MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162090439 · doi:10.82308/25291

Aviation insurance : a Montreal '99 perspective

2006· dissertation· en· W7162090439 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sebastian. Fernandez-Pena

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationConventionAviationUnificationOrder (exchange)Perspective (graphical)DoctrineAviation law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Article 50 of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, also known as the Montreal Convention of 1999, places an obligation on the States Parties whereby their carriers are required to maintain adequate insurance coverage, but without providing any definition or guidance as to how the term "adequate" should be interpreted or understood. This thesis, then, not only pinpoints the lack of accuracy of the terms contained in Article 50 but also suggests how the provision should be construed. In order to do so, this project studies the origins of aviation insurance as well as its main characteristics and practice; presents an overview of the legal doctrine prompted as a consequence of the incorporation of Article 50; performs a thorough study of the evolution of Article 50; and concludes with a comparative study of other regional and domestic legal regimes requiring compulsory aviation insurance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Law and Aviation→French-language works237,207→