MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W629189181 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511894879

Re-imagining the Trust

2012· book· en· W629189181 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lionel Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2012
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrust lawInstitutionBlind trustChinaConventionExpress trustPolitical scienceLawVoting trustSociologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the trust is generally seen as a creation of the common law tradition, modern civilian systems are increasingly interested in incorporating the trust institution. This collection of essays explores multiple civilian experiences with the trust. The reform of Quebec's trust institution attracted worldwide attention in 1994. Louisiana's 1964 Trust Code stands in an uneasy relationship with its general law of property. Israel has had a fascinating pluralist experience of multiples trusts. The People's Republic of China passed a Trust Law in 2001 and the development of the trust in this important economy is a matter of great interest and some controversy. France adopted a trust in 2007, and in Italy, trusts can be created through the choice of foreign governing law, under the Hague Trusts Convention. The concluding chapter draws conclusions from all the essays and sets out challenges for future research in the comparative law of trusts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207