Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<JATS1:p>This open access book examines the conflict of law rules in East Asian states. With a focus on the laws in Mainland China, Japan and South Korea, the book also looks at the rules of Hong Kong and Taiwan.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>Beyond a description of the substance of the current law, the book highlights the evolution these jurisdictions have undergone since being adopters of rules developed in European and North American legal systems. As evidenced by recent modernisations in their private law regimes, these East Asian states are now innovators, creating rules that are more suited to the local concerns. Significantly, the new approaches to private international law taken by China and Japan are themselves being adopted by other jurisdictions, shifting the locus of influence in this important area of law.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>The chapters in part one give a contextual overview of the legal regimes of Mainland China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. This part is intended to foster a deeper understanding of how the systems are changing to better fit the particular national approaches to law. A more in-depth view of the rules on private international law follows in part two, where the rules of Hong Kong and Taiwan are set forth in addition to those of the rest of China and Japan and South Korea. Part three provides a detailed look at the conflict rules relevant to commercial law, specifically as regards international jurisdiction of courts, while part four examines the rules applying to family law and succession law.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>Written in an easily accessible style, the book is a valuable resource for scholars as well as practitioners of East Asian law, private international law, and comparative law.</JATS1:p> <JATS1:p>Volume 9 in the series Studies in Private International Law – Asia</JATS1:p>
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it