MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970988389 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v12n5p25

About Prospects of Participation of Russia in the Convention on the International order of Alimony Recovering of 2007

2019· article· en· W2970988389 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zamira A. Akhmetyanova, O. N. Nizamieva, И И Новикова

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal and Regulatory Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKazan Federal University
KeywordsRatificationConventionLegislationAlimonyLawPolitical scienceAccessionEnforcementOrder (exchange)BusinessPoliticsEuropean unionInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article analyzes the prospects for the possible participation of the Russian Federation in the Convention on the International order of alimony recovering and Other Forms of Family Maintenance in 2007. Identified factors contributing to the ratification of the Convention, as well as circumstances that create certain difficulties. Among the first are: universality of the Convention; compliance of many provisions of the Convention with the norms of family, civil procedural legislation and legislation on enforcement proceedings of the Russian Federation; the existence of a real mechanism that facilitates the effective alimony recovering abroad, and thereby satisfies the vital needs of needy family members. Among the factors of a “restraining nature”, some differences were noted in the provisions of the Convention and Russian legislation regarding entities entitled to alimony. In addition, Russia's accession to the Convention may require a review of national legislation on the provision of free legal aid. However, the system of reservations and declarations of amendment or cancellation of the rules provided for in the Convention allows to mitigate the constraints. As a result, it was concluded that for the Russian Federation, ratification of this Convention will have a greater effect and will solve the problem of receiving alimony from abroad.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicLegal and Regulatory AnalysisFrench-language works237,207