La inacabada protección de los pasajeros en el transporte aéreo frente a las cancelaciones y los accidentes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEl Reglamento 261/2004 tiene por finalidad la proteccion del pasajero como consumidor y, por ello, contiene unos derechos minimos que necesariamente deben ser respetados por las companias aereas ante determinados incumplimientos contractuales y, en concreto, ante una cancelacion de vuelo. Por su parte, la responsabilidad de las companias aereas por danos en los casos de muerte o de lesion corporal causados a los pasajeros en caso de accidente en la Union Europea se encuentra contenida en el Reglamento 889/2002 que incorpora el regimen del Convenio de Montreal. Ambas normas se encuentran plagadas de conceptos juridicos indeterminados, desde la delimitacion del termino vuelo, pasando por el de pasajero, cancelacion, circunstancia extraordinaria, accidente o, incluso lesion, que son objeto del presente estudio. EnglishRegulation 261/2004 has the purpose of protecting the passenger as a consumer and, therefore, contains minimum rights that must necessarily be respected by the airlines in the event of certain contractual breaches and, in particular, in the event of cancellation of flights. On the other hand, the liability of air carriers for damage relating to death or personal injury caused to passengers in case of accident in the European Union is contained in Regulation 889/2002 which incorporates the Montreal Convention. Both Regulations are full of undefined legal concepts, from the delimitation of the term flight, passing through the one of passenger, cancellation, extraordinary circumstance, accident or even injury, that are object of the present study.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it