MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W36033888 · doi:10.1017/s2071832200005459

The Introduction of Real Estate Investment Trusts [REITs] in Germany

2007· article· en· W36033888 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Constantin M. Lachner, Rafael von Heppe

Bibliographic record

VenueGerman Law Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal estate and construction management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReal estate investment trustParliamentGermanLegislatorGerman governmentQuarter (Canadian coin)Government (linguistics)BusinessReal estatePolitical scienceAccountingFinanceLawPoliticsLegislation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The German Real Estate Investment Trust – or, G-REIT – is in the centre of interest in Germany these days and expected to be introduced in Germany in the beginning of 2007. After a preparation phase initiated in 2003 by a lobbying group (“IFD”) under the former German government, the new government has most recently drafted a bill with respect to the introduction of G-REITs (“bill”). This bill remains to be subject to parliamentary discussion and is likely to be partially modified before its final adoption: in addition to its passage in the Bundestag (Federal Parliament), it requires the approval of the Bundesrat (German Federal Council). Following its first reading it will be committed to the Financial Committee, which will conduct hearings. However, the legislator intends to pass the bill in the first quarter of 2007 to take retroactive effect as of 1 January 2007. This essay intends to outline fundamental corporate, capital market, and tax related G-REIT parameters provided for by the G-REIT Act in its present form.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerman Law JournalSame topicReal estate and construction managementFrench-language works237,207