COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RUSSIAN AND FOREIGN EXPERIENCE OF LEGAL REGULATION AND APPLICATION OF THE RULES ON FACULTATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE OBLIGATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The legal regulation of "classical" institutions of private law differs signiicantly in the country aspect, which determines the need for comparative legal study in order to improve domestic civil legislation. Facultative and alternative obligations that have received extensive legal regulation in the rules of the civil code as a result of a large-scale reform of the law of obligations, need a competent scientiic and practical assessment, taking into account the experience of their legal regulation in foreign legal orders. The scien-tiic novelty of this study is that on the basis of the new theoretical provisions and novelties of the domestic legislation revealed in the work, new constructive provisions of the emerging civil law theory of facultative and alternative obligations were developed, which allowed to form a comprehensive understanding of the concept and mechanism of the proper execution of these obligations in Russian and international law, as well as in some foreign legal orders (Germany, France, Latvia, Israel, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Quebec, Moldova, Austria). At the same time, the article substantiates a fundamentally new author's approach to the study of these obligations in a comparative way - through the prism of four concepts that take place in foreign legal contracts: the concept of detailed legal regulation of the construction of an alternative obligation; the concept of "truncated" legal regulation of the construction of an alternative obligation; the concept of detailed legal regulation of the structures of an alternative and facultative obligation; the concept of legal regulation of the construction of an alternative obligation without the use of this concept. The result of this comparative legal study was the author's proposals to reform the institutions of facultative and alternative obligations in terms of specifying the mechanism of their proper execution, as well as the legal consequences of the inability to provide one or more executions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".