Disputes and Impediments to the Making of a Grant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The caveat is entered by notice in Form 3 (Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987 (see Form 7.13). The caveator may attend the probate registry or sub-registry personally and complete Form 3 (r 44(2)(a)), or he may send it at his own risk by post to any registry or sub-registry (r 44(2)(b)). The caveator should ensure that the correct name and any alias names are given and, if the deceased died in the UK, his name and date of death as recorded in the register of deaths should be included in the caveat (District Judges’ Practice Direction, 12 January 1999). On receipt of the caveat, it is entered in the probate computer system and searched against all pending applications. The caveat will not prevent a grant from being issued under a variant of the name entered. For example, a caveat is entered in the name of Stephen Barrie Meeks and a grant subsequently issues in the name of Steven Barry Meekes. A range of dates may be given if the caveator is uncertain of the date of death.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".