Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This third volume in a series on Comparative Succession Law concerns the entitlement of family members to override the provisions of a deceased person’s will to obtain money or assets (or more money or assets) from the person’s estate. Some countries, notably those in the civil law tradition (such as France or Germany), confer a pre-ordained share of the deceased’s estate or of its value on certain members of the deceased’s family, and especially on the deceased’s children and spouse. Other countries, notably those in the common law tradition (such as England, Canada, or Australia), leave the matter to the discretion of the court, the amount awarded depending primarily on financial need. Whichever form it takes, mandatory family provision is both a protection against disinheritance and also, therefore, a restriction on testamentary freedom. The volume focuses on Europe and on countries influenced by the European experience. In addition to detailed treatment of the law in Austria, England and Wales, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Scotland, and Spain, the book also has chapters on Australia and New Zealand, South Africa, the United States, Canada, the countries of Latin America, and the People’s Republic of China. Some other countries are covered more briefly, and there is a separate chapter on Islamic law. The book opens with accounts of Roman law and of the law in medieval and early-modern Europe, and it concludes with a comparative assessment of the law as it is today in the countries and legal traditions surveyed in this volume.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.005 |
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".