MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416405199 · doi:10.36151/rcdi.2025.810.11

La responsabilidad civil en la circulación de vehículos a motor y el interés casacional del artículo 45 del TRLRCSCVM

2025· article· W4416405199 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Fernández de la Iglesia

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista crítica de derecho inmobiliario/Revista crítica de derecho inmobiliario · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComparative International Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalPublic prosecutorTortChristian ministryContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El extenso estudio a lo largo de la historia tanto de la responsabilidad civil como de la circulación de los vehículos a motor nos ha llevado a disponer de una gran diversidad de normativas que, aún a día de hoy, no pueden abarcar todos los supuestos de daños que se generan en la actualidad. En los casos de daños en accidentes de tráfico podemos hablar tanto de responsabilidad civil como de responsabilidad penal, pero hemos querido centrarnos en las dificultades en la determinación de la responsabilidad civil según los elementos que debemos encontrar necesariamente en cada caso. Hemos querido aprovechar este tema para hacer mención a una cuestión de especial interés como es la aplicación por el Tribunal Supremo del artículo 45 del TRLRCSCVM en la STS 69/2025 que hemos analizado a lo largo del presente artículo, hablando de cuestiones como la transmisión de derechos de crédito y la reducción de la indemnización establecida por daños personales en accidentes de tráfico a los herederos.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista crítica de derecho inmobiliario/Revista crítica de derecho inmobiliarioSame topicComparative International Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207