Dispelling and returning: The deconstruction and remodelling of China's pre‐reorganisation system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The pre‐reorganisation system is an innovative corporate rescue mechanism that integrates and builds upon out‐of‐court restructuring and in‐court bankruptcy reorganisation. It combines the dual advantages of both approaches and has been widely applied. As China actively promotes the establishment of an “open, transparent, standardised, and efficient market exit mechanism,” numerous local courts are exploring the pre‐reorganisation system. This article uses diverse research methods—including text mining, empirical analysis and questionnaire surveys—to investigate its judicial practice. The findings show that: government and court dominance in pre‐reorganisation is inevitable; initiation procedures are inappropriate and deviate from the system's original design; the system's positioning is misaligned, potentially causing case delays; and rule design is disordered with low accessibility, leading to unsatisfactory outcomes. The study proposes, firstly, to redefine the boundaries of administrative power, judicial power and market power in pre‐reorganisation, to establish a tripartite interaction model scharacterised by administrative complementarity, judicial guidance and market dominance, thereby correcting the excessive involvement of non‐market forces. Secondly, it suggests managing the out‐of‐court restructuring at the source (i.e., the front end) of the pre‐reorganisation process. Thirdly, it aims to grasp the dimensions of judicial efficacy and public governance in the application of pre‐reorganisation procedures, ensuring their correct implementation. Lastly, it seeks to construct a multiparty interest coordination mechanism that promotes benign collaboration and to improve safeguard mechanisms to ensure the smooth completion of the pre‐reorganisation process and its effective connection with subsequent stages, such as liquidation and sreorganisation. This research constructs a diversified, multilevel rescue mechanism that is balanced, unified and efficient, providing a new case for international comparative studies and a new direction for China's spre‐reorganisation rules.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".