MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936160124

La responsabilidad extracontractual por daños causados por aeronaves a terceros en la superficie en el derecho colombiano

2018· article· es· W2936160124 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de derecho del transporte: Terrestre, marítimo, aéreo y multimodal · 2018
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative International Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesLiabilityDerechoDamagesLawArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

espanolEn el Derecho colombiano, la responsabilidad por danos causados por aeronaves a terceros en la superficie fue regulada por el legislador en el Codigo de Comercio, con base en los Convenios de Roma de 1933 y 1952. Debido a los acontecimientos terroristas del 11 de septiembre de 2001 estos convenios perdieron vigencia, y fueron sustituidos por el Convenio de Montreal de 2009. En este articulo, se analizan las normas del Codigo de Comercio en lo que se refiere al regimen de responsabilidad civil aplicable, los hechos generadores de danos, los danos indemnizables, las causales de exoneracion de responsabilidad, los montos de indemnizacion y la accion de repeticion. EnglishIn Colombian law, liability far damages caused by aircrafts to third parties on the surface is regulated by the Commercial Code under the Rome Conventions of 1933 and 1952. Dueto the September 11 attacks, those Conventions lost their validity and were replaced by the Montreal Convention of 2009. This article examines the Commercial Code's provisions with regard to the applicable liability regimes, events giving rise to damages, compensable damages, limits of liability, exoneration and recours.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it