MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211192400 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v15n1p1

Impact of Covid_19 on E-commerce (From a Legal Point of View)

2021· article· en· W3211192400 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khaled Abed Alshakhanbeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForce majeureImpossibilityBusinessObstacleClosure (psychology)Law and economicsPosition (finance)Point (geometry)LawCommerceEconomicsPolitical scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spread of the Corona virus and the closure of borders and the ban on travel and commercial bodies in companies, which resorted to many commercial activities, relying on a large scale, e-commerce, tourism in that, commercial relations, as a result of the inability to fulfill their contractual obligations, which led jurists to rely on the theory of emergency conditions to explain the impossibility or difficulty of fulfilling the obligations of the contractors on the terms of contracts, and as a result of the occurrence of many contractual problems, the affect of a virus on the capacity of contractors to fulfill their obligations. This article aims to analyze the impact of the spread of the virus on contractual obligations by relying on the force majeure theory, and the position of jurists on using this theory in explaining the impact of the spread of this epidemic on the ability of the contracting parties to fulfill their obligations. The researcher has come out with a set of results, the most important of which is that the new Corona virus can be considered an obstacle or a force majeure, based on what was stated in the contents of the provisions of the relevant bodies, and this will have legal and economic implications for the contractual obligations of the various international commercial contracts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory StudiesFrench-language works237,207