Evaluating Legal Status of Inconsistent Possessions with Stipulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In our law, in both terms of analysis and legal principles, condition is not a part of consideration so commitment due to the condition cannot be known at the same level of main conventional commitments, but condition has a relative independence while it has dependence and communication with contract. In fact the condition is an independent undertaking which its survival has been depended to existence of contract by backbone of both parties not vice versa. The final purpose of both parties from obligation and undertaking is realization of contingent commitment; so a condition which its execution to be out of responsibility of one against whom the condition is made is null such as each non-executive commitment. Invalidity of impossible condition cannot be known lack of intention of both parties. Therefore the invalidity of impossible condition can be known abort of tradition and necessity of Gharar in the condition. The purpose of conducting this was evolution of legal status of inconsistent possession with stipulation and is bail of executing opposing transaction inconsistent with condition different according to this issue that legal inconsistent possession to be covenented or possessory contract.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".