MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7111538996

La protesta de retraso del equipaje facturado en avión. Especial referencia al Parte de Irregularidad de Equipaje (PIR) : sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de 5 de junio de 2025, Asunto C-292/24: AD e Iberia Líneas Aéreas de España SA Operadora Unipersonal

2025· article· es· W7111538996 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnimal Law and Welfare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribunalTreatyJurisprudence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El TJUE, en la Sentencia AD e Iberia de 5 de junio de 2025, interpreta el art. 31.2 Convenio de Montreal y admite la posibilidad del pasajero afectado de protestar tan pronto como conoce el retraso en el equipaje facturado, sin supeditarlo a su puesta a disposición. Esta doctrina, en mi opinión, ha de aplicarse también al supuesto habitual en que el pasajero presenta un Parte de Irregularidad de Equipaje (PIR), que tendría el valor jurídico de protesta.

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)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona)Same topicAnimal Law and WelfareFrench-language works237,207