Úmluva o sjednocení některých pravidel o mezinárodní letecké přepravě z roku 1999 (Montrealská úmluva) se zaměřením na rozsah aplikace
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
The purpose of the thesis is to analyse the scope of application of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air signed at Montreal on 28th May 1999 (Montreal Convention). The thesis comprises four chapters, each which deals with different aspects of the scope of application of the Montreal Convention. The thesis is approached by the analytical method using classical four methods of interpretation and is based mainly on foreign sources: English, American, Canadian and German in particular. It includes up-to-date relevant court decisions, primarily from American courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union. Czech sources are used especially when dealing with theoretical and general questions. No Czech court decision is included as by the time of handing in this thesis there was no accessible decision of any higher court of the Czech Republic. Chapter one deals primarily with Article one of the Montreal Convention which contains some important terms having effect on the scope of application of the Convention as well as containing the term international carriage. Further in this chapter is discussed the subject-matter scope of application of the Convention and instruments expanding the scope of application of the Montreal Convention (successive...
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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