La Refonte Du Code Civil Roumain Et le Code civil du Québec (The Revision of the Romanian Civil Code and the Quebec Civil Code)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Seul parmi les pays de l'ancien bloc sovietique a avoir conserve jusqu’en 1989 son code civil moderne, la Roumanie a neanmoins cru bon de proceder a la revision de celui-ci et de son Code de procedure civile. Les travaux se sont deroules avec l'aide des specialistes quebecois, de 1999 a 2004. Le Parlement est presentement en train de voter la version amendee du projet, adopte par le gouvernement. Dans leur article, les auteurs discutent des raisons pour lesquelles le Code civil du Quebec a eu un role notable sur le corpus civiliste roumain. Ils rappellent egalement l'influence des autres modeles de meme que de l'experience historique des autres nations sur la Roumanie dans l'elaboration des amendements a sa legislation civiliste. Sont egalement detailles les differents travaux ayant mene au projet legislatif. L'avenir renseignera sur la reception et l'applicabilite des divers amendements. English Abstract: Romania appeared in 1989 as the only member of the former Soviet satellite countries group who succeeded in safeguarding its XIX century Civil code, Nevertheless, it was decided it would be a good idea to revise it, togther with the Civil procedure code. In their article, the authors discussed the reasons why the Civil code of Quebec had a notable impact on the Romanian code. They stretch out also the inflence exercised by other models and the different stages of building up the new civil codification. The fture will enlight us on the reception and the applicability of the different amendments received on this occasions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".