MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118614791

El reenvío en el Derecho Internacional Privado contemporáneo

2020· article· es· W3118614791 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Caroline D. Bergeron

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative constitutional jurisprudence studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDerechoHumanitiesGeographyPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este trabajo de tesis constituye un analisis comparativo de la institucion del reenvio en el Derecho internacional privado de Venezuela y Quebec, haciendo enfasis en las particularides de los respectivos ordenamientos –antes y despues de las ultimas reformas en materia de Derecho internacional privado en cada uno– y en los desarrollos doctrinales y jurisprudenciales de los mismos. La tesis destaca el caracter valorativo del reenvio, mas alla de las criticas que se han formulado a su naturaleza mecanica, procedente de los defectos de aplicacion de las normas de conflicto.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.337 · 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
GenreOther

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 topicComparative constitutional jurisprudence studiesFrench-language works237,207