Bibliographic record
Abstract
Testamentary trust fund Abstract Trust funds, and testamentary trust funds in particular, represent an innovative legal concept in Czech law based on the Quebec model of fiducie. As a form of patrimony by appropriation, testamentary trust funds enable flexible mortis causa property dispositions and potentially offer diverse opportunities for tailored solutions in intergenerational transfer of property compared to traditional inheritance law instruments. The thesis provides a critical analysis of the legal framework of testamentary trust funds, outlines current views in Czech legal theory and identifies the problematic aspects associated with the creation, establishment and operation of the testamentary trust funds, as well as with their termination. Within the thesis, the author offers de lege ferenda propositions using an analytical and descriptive approach. In the first part of the thesis, the author focuses on the foreign sources of the Czech trust fund, particularly on the Quebec fiducie, whose legal framework is a direct precursor for the Czech trust fund, but also on the Anglo-American trust, which in turn inspired Quebec legislation. He then goes on to define the basic characteristics of the trust fund. This part of the thesis serves as a general introduction to trust funds and explains the concept...
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".