Huwelijkse voorwaarden met gescheiden vermogens. Koude uitsluiting in het licht van de dynamische en affectieve relatie van echtgenoten.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examines the problems arising upon divorce in the event spouses concluded a prenuptial agreement consisting of complete separation of property under Dutch law. If spouses do not sign a prenuptial agreement, the default matrimonial property regime applying in the Netherlands since 2018 is a limited community of property. This limited community of property covers premarital assets held in joint ownership and assets acquired during the marriage. This is a form of solidarity that protects the less monied spouse. Spouses can also sign a prenuptial agreement containing a more limited community of property, or complete separation of property with a netting covenant which results in in a participation of certain acquisitions during the marriage. Relinquishing this protection by signing a prenuptial agreement consisting only of complete separation of property can therefore be a dangerous choice. In essence, the main question of this research concerns the extent to which the prenuptial agreement consisting of complete separation of property continues to be justified in view of the detrimental consequences that such an agreement can have in the event of divorce, given that spouses signing such an agreement do not share in each other’s assets either during or at the end of the marriage. The adverse consequences in the event of divorce can include serious financial problems and feelings of unfairness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".