Trust as a Legislative Challenge: Bipolar Relation vs Quasi-Corporate Status? Basic Trust Models in Legal Practice, Theory, and Legislation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trust is a multifaced and enigmatic legal construction. The recent reform of trust law in the Czech Republic is based on a very demanding legal concept, obviously linked with the “fiducie” model in the Law of Québec. In contrast, the legal community in Germany has to cope with trust issues on the basic of very few and simple Civil Code provisions under the law of obligations. This concept has, however, has proved to be fruitful producing three elementary types of trust constructions: (a) simple bipolar mandate agreements, (b) trust agreements in the benefit of third persons, and (c) complex trust organisations serving as quasi-legal bodies. The Czech trust law, recently enacted in ss. 1400 et seqq., is appropriate for the third (most complicated) type c of trust construction. It may, however, fall short as far as simple trust agreements (a, b) are concerned. The German law, on the other hand, has to cope with a noticeable drawback regarding type c: the lack of transparency of trust based quasi-entities.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".