MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135545966

Topical issues of the regulation of international air carriage

2011· dissertation· cs· W7135545966 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Markéta Knotková

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languagecs
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiabilityConventionStrict liabilityTreatyAir transportUnificationInternational law
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis deals with topical issues of international air law, namely international regulation of air carrier's liability in carriage of passengers, baggage and cargo. The first multilateral treaty to consider and unify this topic was the Warsaw Convention in 1929. It prescribed the main requirements of the documents of carriage, i.e. the passenger ticket, the baggage check and the air waybill. In particular, the air carrier is liable for personal injury or death of passengers, loss or damage of baggage or cargo and for damage resulting from delay. The key points of the liability regime governed by the Warsaw Convention are presumptive liability and the maximum liability limits expressed in French Gold Francs. Due to the subsequent development of air transport these rules had to be modernized. The Warsaw Convention was amended with several Protocols and a Supplementary Convention, which together create the so-called "Warsaw system". The purpose of these documents was, amongst other things, to tighten up the liability regime while trying to establish strict liability and raise the liability limits. In 1999 a further unification of air carrier's liability took place with the creation of the Montreal Convention. Although it adopted some key liability provisions from previous documents, it stipulated...

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicInternational Law and AviationFrench-language works237,207