MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400428040 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v17n3p56

Impact of the New Company Law's Limited Contribution System on Limited Liability Companies

2024· article· en· W4400428040 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Governance and Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimited liabilityShareholderCorporate lawCapital (architecture)Share capitalLiabilityBusinessAutonomyLawFinanceEconomicsCorporate governancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summarizing the ten years of experience and lessons learned from the operation of the contributed capital system, after three years of deliberation and five years of overhaul, a new change in the Company Law was ushered in. The Company Law of the People's Republic of China (2023 Revision) was voted and passed on December 29, 2023, and came into effect on July 1, 2024. The new Company Law continues to implement the Contributed Capital System, replacing the Fully Contributed System with a Limited Contribution System. It consolidates the positive results of the operation of the Contributed Capital System and amends the deficiencies in the actual operation, better implements the autonomy-based Contributed Capital System, and provides a new path for the development of the Contributed Capital System in the future. In this paper, we will start from the impact of the limited liability company (LLC) under the limited contribution system, and discuss the reasonable interpretation path of the shareholders' interest in the limited contribution system, the company's capital formation system, and the shareholders' responsibility in the light of the revision of the new Company 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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicCorporate Governance and LawFrench-language works237,207