Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ii Abstrakt a 5 klíčových slov v anglickém jazyce Anglo-American, European, Islamic legal culture (comparative study) Abstract The aim of the J.D. qualification thesis is to describe the large legal systems and to analyze them in the form of a comparative study. The J.D. qualification thesis consists of six chapters. The first chapter contains the characteristics of large legal systems and their differentiation and, in addition to the compared legal cultures, it also briefly discusses African customary law, the customary law of the Indian subcontinent (based on the religious tradition of Hinduism and Buddhism) and Sino-Japanese legal culture. The second chapter focuses on the description of Anglo-American legal culture and its subsystems, especially English law, US law, Canadian law, legal systems of Australia and New Zealand. The third chapter deals with continental legal culture and its subsystems, specifically the French, Austrian, German, Swiss, Scandinavian, Latin American and European Union legal cultures. At the same time, this chapter briefly summarizes other important civil law codifications of European countries, such as the Netherlands, Romania and Russia. The fourth chapter is focused on the Islamic legal culture and the importance of religion in society. The main part of the J.D. qualification...
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it