Gaps and Analogies in the Legal Definition of the Lease Facility in Russia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is relevant, as multi-variant rental relationships are wide-spread, requiring a seamless legal definition of the key elements of the lease design. The aim is to identify and, by analogy, comprehensively develop the legal regime of problematic and atypical leases, thus strengthening the doctrinal basis for filling legal gaps in the practice of applying civil law by analogy. Combined with special technical-legal and comparative-legal methodological tools, the article applied general logical methods of analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, comparison and generalization. This research is peculiar in that the method of analogy acted simultaneously as a means, and as an object of study. Specific gaps in the legal definition of the list and properties of present and future things and their parts as admissible lease facilities were identified; a practical idea to improve the regulatory structure of the lease arrangement was formulated. The work helps to achieve greater contractual freedom and variability of economic activity, promotes the involvement of a greater number of material goods in the property turnover, at the same time helping to unlock the potential of the analogy method in the legal regulation of economic activity.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".