MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091998301 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v22i3.2864

Contract and Negotiation

2020· article· en· W3091998301 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paolo Gallo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Contract Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanDoctrineJurisprudenceLawNegotiationCivil codeAutonomyLegal doctrineCode (set theory)Political scienceHistoryComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The draft is dedicated to the study of the role of private autonomy in the contractual field; Roman law did not yet know a general category of contract, which has been developed over the last two or three centuries within the school of natural law; in later times in the German area an even more general and abstract figure has been established, namely the legal shop, which has been adopted by the German civil code, but not also by the Italian code of 1942; nevertheless, the figure of the legal shop has also taken root in Italy at the level of doctrine and jurisprudence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.024
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicEuropean and International Contract LawFrench-language works237,207