Legal Nature of the Contract of Succession as a Special Institute of Civil Law of the Russian Federation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the authors analyse a new institution for the Russian legal system, namely, the contract of succession institution. It is a qualitatively new way to transfer property, which was legislated as a supplement to the existing grounds of succession. It is noted that one of the advantages of this type of succession is that this type of agreement enables a property owner not only to outline the circle of successors during his/her lifetime but also to stipulate clear conditions for their entry into rights of succession. That is, thanks to this agreement, it becomes possible to determine to whom and what kind of property will be transferred after the death of the owner, and what conditions must be met for this. In this paper, the authors correlate a contract of succession with mixed categories: they compare (only by some criteria) a contract of succession with a unilateral transaction - a last will and testament. The authors conclude that the institution of the contract of succession is a symbiosis of succession and contractual legal relations (mixed nature), which may lead to certain problems in the future during the enforcement of the current legislation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".