MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200009289 · doi:10.1002/iir.1444

A major step in developing Mainland China's cross‐border insolvency law

2021· article· en· W4200009289 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meng Seng Wee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Insolvency Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Insolvency and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainland ChinaInsolvencyLawBankruptcyReciprocity (cultural anthropology)TreatyJurisdictionPolitical scienceChinaMainlandBusinessLaw and economicsSociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Section 5 of Mainland China's Enterprise Bankruptcy Law provides that, in the absence of treaties, Chinese courts may recognise foreign insolvency proceedings based on reciprocity. The meaning of reciprocity is very uncertain, and no rules have been laid down on how recognition or assistance may be given to foreign insolvency proceedings. The Mainland has not entered into any treaty or arrangement on the matter with another jurisdiction. On 14 May 2021, the Mainland signed an agreement with Hong Kong, under which the Mainland issued an Opinion on the rules for the recognition of and assistance to Hong Kong insolvency proceedings. This article argues that this is a momentous development for both the Mainland and Hong Kong. It explains how the Opinion adapted provisions and ideas from the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross‐Border Insolvency with modifications to suit the Mainland's needs and the objectives it wanted to achieve; in particular, the Mainland's concern with mitigating the risks arising from the Opinion's implementation. At the same time, however, cases decided after the coming into force of the arrangement revealed the hurdles posed by the corporate structure that Chinese groups in Hong Kong adopted to the utility of the arrangement, foreshadowing dynamic developments in practice and debate in the doctrinal and theoretical spheres.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Insolvency ReviewSame topicCorporate Insolvency and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207