Voyage rights in review: Indonesian tourism and aviation legislation
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
Indonesia’s ratification of the Montreal Convention 1999 in 2016 and its implementation in national law has significantly affected the protection rights of Indonesian citizens globally and locally. This Convention ensures that Indonesian travelers are entitled to international benefits, provisions, and compensation for damages caused by airline services. Through an examination of Indonesian statutes, cases, and a comparative approach, the authors have concluded that there is a significant need to amend the Indonesian Aviation Act to solve the conflict of law that exists between the Montreal Convention of 1999 and Indonesian law. Specifically, this conflict exists with respect to the implementation of the Montreal Convention 1999 in Indonesian domestic law because of the superior hierarchy of the Convention over Indonesian law. While the Montreal Convention 1999 applies to all international carriage activities, the Indonesian Aviation Act covers domestic and international carriages only to and from Indonesia’s territory and to all Indonesian carriers outside Indonesia’s territory. This study discusses the legal consequences that impact Indonesian air travelers according to the differences between international conventions and domestic law.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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