MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380521246 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.52

Interpretation of the Concept of “Enterprise” in the Context of Latin American Legal Scholars’ Contemporary Ideas on the Tasks of Civil and Commercial Codifications

2022· article· en· W4380521246 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ksenia Michailovna Belikova

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRUDN University
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)Latin AmericansContext (archaeology)LawRelevance (law)DoctrinePolitical scienceLegal doctrineSociologyHistoryPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relevance of the study is connected with its complex nature, giving an understanding of the vector of development of civil and commercial codifications in some Latin American countries, based on recent statutory regulations, which were not previously adequately reflected in the doctrine. From this perspective, therefore, this study fills the gap in the relevant knowledge. The author examines the features of the legal regime in certain Latin American countries to comprehend and show which trends prevail in a particular country and how this is reflected in the tasks of civil and commercial codifications. Thereby, the results obtained by the author are given in a comparative aspect in the context of Latin American legal experts’ ideas on the tasks of civil and commercial codifications concerning the legal recognition of the interpretation of the concept of “enterprise”.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.034
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.288
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 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Criminology and SociologySame topicCorporate Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207