MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7046297107

Compensation et insolvabilité. Questions choisies

2014· article· fr· W7046297107 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDIAL (Catholic University of Leuven) · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompensation (psychology)Face (sociological concept)Subject (documents)Quarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le mécanisme de la compensation constitue un mode classique d’extinction des obligations connu de tous les juristes. Elle est devenue, au fil des années, un épouvantable labyrinthe pour le praticien. Son essor en droit de l’insolvabilité, compte tenu du droit de préférence qu’elle confère, la rend aujourd’hui incontournable. Les enjeux pour le débiteur qui fait face à une procédure d’insolvabilité sont de taille tandis que les institutions bancaires en sont particulièrement friandes. Le présent exposé examine le sort de la compensation, d’une part, en cas de faillite et, d’autre part, lors d’une procédure de réorganisation judiciaire.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDIAL (Catholic University of Leuven)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207