MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287864669 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3687204

Theoretical and Practical Problems of Protecting an Employee's Rights Due to Industrial Accident

2020· article· en· W4287864669 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
V.D. Dresviannikova S.Kh. Barehamian

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccident (philosophy)BusinessIndustrial AccidentForensic engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Law and economicsEngineeringEnvironmental healthSociologyMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the article, the authors state that the basis of any social state is the principle of ensuring social stability and security as well as social rights. The legal nature of such a legal category as “industrial accident” is investigated. It is concluded that the specified category is characterized by the lack of conscious will of the person, in other words, specific actions aimed at deliberately harming the worker himself. The national legislation of Ukraine in the sphere of the employee rights protection in case of industrial accident is investigated. The methods and peculiarities of employees' rights protection on the account of industrial accidents are analyzed. Ukrainian legislation is noted to provide presently a wide range of possibilities, ways of protecting the rights of the insured person against industrial accidents, among which, in particular, the authors distinguish the most effective ones: recognition of a transaction invalid, compulsory performance of duty, compensation for damages, other ways of compensation and moral harm. The comparative analysis of legal categories “insurance payment” and “insurance indemnity” is carried out. Compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by an industrial accident is a rather problematic issue, which may be related to the unequal application of substantive law by courts of various instances, as well as the existence of certain loopholes in the law. It is established that, from both practical and theoretical point of view, justification of compensation for non-pecuniary damage is contradictory, since the courts, although mainly based on the interests of the employee, but often reduce the amount of compensation, which in their opinion is clearly overestimated, it is necessary to approach this issue carefully in order to achieve fair satisfaction. The jurisprudence of Ukraine and some foreign countries in this field, in particular Great Britain, America, Canada, is investigated. The authors conclude that the Anglo-Saxon legal family is more advanced in the area of non-pecuniary damage than the countries of the Romano-German legal system.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207