{"meta":{"query_hash":"59494f77e226","filters":{"topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes"},"cohort_total":283,"direct_labels_cover":1,"predictions_cover":283,"exported":283,"export_cap":100000,"truncated":false,"label_status":"direct model label, unvalidated","prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated (Codex and Gemma teacher distillation)","score_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","snapshot":{"source":"OpenAlex, pinned release, all 482 partitions","release":"2026-06-24","frame_built":"2026-07-12"},"permalink":"https://metacan.xera.ac/q/59494f77e226","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?topic=Jury+Decision+Making+Processes"},"results":[{"id":"W108532366","doi":"","title":"A Note on the Process of Introspection","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Scandinavian studies in law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Introspection; Process (computing); Epistemology; Meaning (existential); Business process discovery; Psychology; Law; Sociology; Political science; Computer science; Work in process; Philosophy; Business","score_opus":0.061060576432997976,"score_gpt":0.4347832200539653,"score_spread":0.3737226436209673,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W108532366","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.536501,0.0016638824,0.00009017466,0.018314412,0.001123094,0.0006868931,0.0000071910486,0.000116083145,0.4414973],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99847466,0.00020634918,0.00010738688,0.00039978343,0.0002507445,0.000028754655,1.2280015e-7,0.000005856835,0.00052631664],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99897105,0.00008412941,0.00019667466,0.00016273724,0.00038754207,0.0001978801],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991797,0.0004091171,0.00009927727,0.00014181768,0.00014799685,0.000022082306],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007479573,0.00007764006,0.0001603511,0.000056351335,0.00040948877,0.000021629416,0.00024480507,0.000041456937,0.0000589723],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00074732193,0.00005198098,0.000031749936,0.0005450591,0.0012134012,0.00012522002,0.00004095502,0.000121301935,0.000031068674],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000056580906,0.00009127577,0.002436672,0.000029942814,0.000020864321,0.0000023054245,0.056379702,0.000111048226,0.00001146151,0.91739696,0.0019757957,0.021487413],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001622662,0.0005381724,0.013892117,0.0018056395,0.000065917826,0.000005007595,0.15097778,0.000053263095,0.004911287,0.43530917,0.38999942,0.0008195375],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00012448973,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005018732,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.48208776,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00017933971,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000034583023,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.44708276},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W139693827","doi":"10.25916/sut.26268931","title":"Current identification procedure practices: a survey of Ontario police officers","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Swinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Criminal justice; Presentation (obstetrics); Queen (butterfly); Media studies; Library science; Sociology; Criminology; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.10528375456021807,"score_gpt":0.403444767337341,"score_spread":0.2981610127771229,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W139693827","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9774404,0.0011078236,0.00027896988,0.0022151077,0.00016309152,0.0008249069,0.00004408445,0.00022134613,0.017704252],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9900453,0.0004575816,0.0010298118,0.0000033958452,0.000049119342,0.0000022254615,0.00002723043,0.000017890456,0.008367447],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9956112,0.0005237837,0.0005394885,0.00069184246,0.0018291374,0.00080458634],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99347734,0.00071027275,0.0010971493,0.0007902361,0.0037854966,0.00013949389],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0059769363,0.0002024741,0.00045614887,0.0021337715,0.0008521577,0.00006633236,0.002104737,0.0004671824,0.0004659792],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004582321,0.00023869782,0.00012476054,0.0055101505,0.0024514229,0.00071724126,0.00048325676,0.0010854711,0.00006392562],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.001480781,0.0038703266,0.73167115,0.0007114155,0.00035710668,0.000060511968,0.028873997,0.00017739323,0.0077497275,0.059475306,0.08573724,0.07983502],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013813928,0.0003149767,0.4663583,0.00043523422,0.00009224799,0.0000059242293,0.017879551,0.000026586244,0.0033680853,0.008801852,0.5008164,0.0005194734],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.550205,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6429675,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.41507915,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0011606988,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0066981767,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989329},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1480577645","doi":"","title":"Balancing Legal Process with Scientific Expertise: Expert Witness Methodology in Five Nations and Suggestions for Reform of Post-Daubert U.S. Reliability Determinations","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Premise; Strengths and weaknesses; Expert witness; Law; Process (computing); Witness; Political science; Scientific evidence; Reliability (semiconductor); Computer science; Psychology; Epistemology","score_opus":0.02631702209993354,"score_gpt":0.37821678574021866,"score_spread":0.35189976364028513,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1480577645","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97612286,0.00036682317,0.018989667,0.003255321,0.0003212444,0.000385411,0.000009244836,0.000026309783,0.00052314467],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9921513,0.0001452523,0.0066895424,0.000028979077,0.0000931621,0.0000838936,0.0000037150382,0.000015244851,0.00078889215],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99757856,0.00021031954,0.00039688763,0.00033043674,0.00042539072,0.0010584067],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99724364,0.0008431013,0.00025616237,0.00018044747,0.0013786902,0.000097961696],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006245429,0.00012619566,0.00023783682,0.0004589008,0.00119124,0.00013771573,0.00036773377,0.00013477365,0.000015874923],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004551738,0.00010271912,0.000050412684,0.00085282803,0.0007825329,0.0007509216,0.00002947444,0.0008993221,5.442793e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00031974196,0.00037862247,0.0049176556,0.00006452747,0.00005316618,0.0000037718605,0.039903563,0.00013897424,0.0065632667,0.8762197,0.000022565207,0.07141443],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0034193303,0.0011936988,0.020588731,0.0003523783,0.00011503123,0.00085499685,0.19339971,0.0009822535,0.0050288932,0.7667111,0.0063451445,0.0010087382],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010129138,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.18651856,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.18550566,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000594932,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005892285,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997434},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1506797660","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2448010","title":"Select the Out-of-Town Appraiser: New Social Science Research on Real Estate Expert Witness Selection","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Witness; Real estate; Selection (genetic algorithm); Estate; Business; Finance; Computer science; Political science; Artificial intelligence; Law","score_opus":0.08201071679426815,"score_gpt":0.45202406389320143,"score_spread":0.3700133470989333,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1506797660","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6101239,0.00045432016,0.027952036,0.017603727,0.002422004,0.00084256206,0.0000014587656,0.00024844435,0.34035155],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99104315,0.003195313,0.000101586345,0.00008104299,0.0018784988,0.000007642241,3.1177294e-7,0.000024147854,0.0036683155],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9923606,0.000992204,0.0003756067,0.0004069952,0.002710249,0.0031543472],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99748886,0.0008159091,0.00028616865,0.00020343206,0.0010226843,0.00018297204],"candidate_categories":["sts","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.024390185,0.00016549417,0.00022931909,0.00042408862,0.004507294,0.0003902156,0.0015643793,0.00012397413,0.000046873534],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0020363706,0.00011951271,0.00010542276,0.0025740017,0.0014266617,0.0005158745,0.00009012033,0.0024572553,0.00003639237],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00017092848,0.00007023533,0.00017873645,0.0000026112943,0.000027540827,5.647648e-7,0.016124226,0.00003667641,0.0012735241,0.44305062,0.0018721165,0.5371922],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0012177262,0.0018085567,0.0017221577,0.00008222952,0.000034473866,0.00006026596,0.039561942,0.00020296575,0.003708891,0.7765478,0.17447676,0.0005762597],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001481523,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0074176276,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.53661597,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014165184,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.016640706,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99984413},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1513751157","doi":"10.1348/135532510x498185","title":"He‐said–she‐said: Contrast effects in credibility assessments and possible threats to fundamental principles of criminal law","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto; Simon Fraser University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Credibility; Witness; Vignette; Plaintiff; Psychology; Compromise; Social psychology; Law; Impeachment; Adjudication; Criminology; Political science","score_opus":0.13284212971910603,"score_gpt":0.45011972212978707,"score_spread":0.31727759241068104,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1513751157","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.95980453,0.00024268377,0.00012816188,0.0016232803,0.00048318066,0.0003653104,0.000009531248,0.00004666892,0.037296657],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99538743,0.000056364985,0.002564585,0.0015586358,0.000085074746,0.000029156108,0.0000019641827,0.0000074589634,0.0003093191],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99792975,0.00025088145,0.00038607116,0.00064987916,0.0002907673,0.0004926755],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988305,0.00051262084,0.00010200143,0.00024040064,0.00008026298,0.00023422552],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007400718,0.00019055558,0.0004198472,0.000108794455,0.00023131663,0.00009309479,0.00032576043,0.0003428218,0.00017471037],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00042889218,0.00015105122,0.000043831576,0.00018295403,0.0013984793,0.00022105643,0.00018085884,0.00046481268,0.000011707549],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00089407957,0.0012606225,0.17553005,0.00014841206,0.000035295318,0.00013346651,0.003092452,0.0000015548261,0.018783927,0.64281225,0.00018499399,0.15712291],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010645911,0.0010124512,0.9485404,0.000035139983,0.000033569417,0.00003297816,0.00088032975,0.000005486537,0.00053338526,0.035030745,0.0126030035,0.00022791584],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00080156367,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004593036,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7730104,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000021958953,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005291969,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.615969},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1531175555","doi":"","title":"피해자의견진술제도에 관한 연구","year":2008,"lang":"ko","type":"article","venue":"형사정책연구원 연구총서","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Injustice; Criminal justice; Harm; Criminology; Relevance (law); Psychology; Political science; Economic Justice; Criminal procedure; Law","score_opus":0.0748599899714725,"score_gpt":0.36290095467671835,"score_spread":0.28804096470524587,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1531175555","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.79001504,0.003102606,0.00074624724,0.006807191,0.004832482,0.00062878616,0.000051156858,0.00053243764,0.19328403],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9470042,0.0019122766,0.0012697985,0.0012911961,0.0013542217,0.000016971799,0.0000050092776,0.000054590564,0.047091734],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9956967,0.00032226555,0.00065362855,0.00078463537,0.0015578391,0.0009848963],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99761456,0.00060752954,0.00032861033,0.00068895123,0.00035722996,0.0004030933],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00090457185,0.00038149548,0.000523971,0.00021415402,0.0016654542,0.00020793047,0.0012258302,0.0004251633,0.0042015365],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013200728,0.00037564308,0.00025871643,0.0015459772,0.0010124079,0.0005343956,0.00025502828,0.00048399647,0.00863833],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002748264,0.0016584102,0.11285197,0.00027967631,0.00028291735,0.0017147426,0.13441059,0.00010690431,0.00047656265,0.046220608,0.5107325,0.19099033],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006580135,0.00016725711,0.059971903,0.00014367476,0.00006291105,0.000067535686,0.003423066,0.000051294654,0.00034474465,0.0068660234,0.92737997,0.000863636],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00055190787,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00037139532,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.41664746,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00019392525,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008523058,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998695},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1535633923","doi":"10.53300/001c.5461","title":"Australian Principles of Evidence (2nd Ed, 2004), Jeremy Gans and Andrew Palmer, Cavendish Publishing Limited","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Bond Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Publishing; Law and economics; Law; Philosophy; Sociology; Political science","score_opus":0.2243581389753008,"score_gpt":0.40113169913804747,"score_spread":0.17677356016274667,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1535633923","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.017160416,0.88041615,0.00012802258,0.04570611,0.0005128661,0.001945094,0.000059662343,0.00024053664,0.053831164],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5605165,0.4259026,0.005898747,0.00391543,0.00029713518,0.00004950394,0.000012441878,0.000045497378,0.0033621737],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977852,0.00017021222,0.00057781127,0.00038688804,0.0007040935,0.00037576238],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99843514,0.00035851853,0.00035581618,0.0003479089,0.000283808,0.00021880679],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002109926,0.00017360404,0.0004702084,0.000054185755,0.0003204088,0.0003791908,0.0005427221,0.00012436115,0.00027658543],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0038033829,0.00013714952,0.000100455814,0.00070289976,0.00042980994,0.001559109,0.000108321234,0.00020802765,0.000025827456],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000022804394,0.00016667113,0.0025121288,0.008550359,0.000060853337,0.000055063654,0.0026396296,0.00001825337,0.0000849859,0.83612555,0.028706558,0.12105715],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001771308,0.000033037908,0.0014415972,0.014777213,0.000083292914,0.000010042422,0.00015815202,1.9580055e-7,0.00009624827,0.0033846782,0.9796342,0.00020418738],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002444927,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0047986344,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9509277,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007360223,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00039777614,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5592795},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1536345125","doi":"","title":"The Canadian Criminal Jury","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Publicity; Jury selection; Law; Verdict; Political science; Criminal trial; Hung jury; Ethnic group; Criminal law; Psychology; Criminology","score_opus":0.05632413810969805,"score_gpt":0.3129060806818751,"score_spread":0.25658194257217704,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1536345125","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.048031166,0.00067369366,0.000023565313,0.0021744207,0.0012358341,0.00019888456,0.000007522958,0.00013153115,0.94752336],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98479825,0.00006121582,0.0007962954,0.0017081293,0.0003575191,0.000017881885,8.849509e-7,0.000015740745,0.012244096],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99831015,0.00015675407,0.00019233626,0.0002358697,0.0005080118,0.0005968925],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986385,0.00019005664,0.000067085,0.00035803643,0.0001960077,0.0005503034],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011170646,0.00010914996,0.00010430675,0.000051425843,0.0030775378,0.00036645954,0.0008604779,0.000121026074,0.0017341913],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0008131985,0.00008381112,0.00006087154,0.00028984636,0.0005517465,0.0002942065,0.000050642822,0.00025770362,0.0020412623],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001877607,0.000015481244,0.0010758691,0.0000039905203,0.0000105843865,0.000028558694,0.0045666895,4.096084e-7,0.0000031956279,0.949684,0.022476392,0.022116054],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006747366,0.000018985422,0.0077830087,0.000012421542,0.00001325411,0.0000021025583,0.0019307622,7.182831e-7,0.00009092227,0.032382924,0.95755863,0.00013877868],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.55656815,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98038435,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.93676704,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00019394251,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012465962,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99917835},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1548323021","doi":"","title":"Setting the table doesn't mean the guests will come to dinner: televised courts in Australia","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Griffith Research Online (Griffith University, Queensland, Australia)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Context (archaeology); Political science; Law; nobody; Sociology; History; Computer science; Computer security","score_opus":0.1548562202324481,"score_gpt":0.4448362839931246,"score_spread":0.2899800637606765,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1548323021","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.91577864,0.00007653584,0.0000544321,0.07900857,0.00037891243,0.0017690007,0.0002896935,0.00018087229,0.0024633484],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.92236626,0.00024520917,0.0012947348,0.00049733825,0.0012379264,0.000011325216,0.000049338847,0.00004817153,0.07424969],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9902184,0.002381458,0.00065598974,0.0010717959,0.0032659108,0.0024064488],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99439853,0.0022459507,0.00025705824,0.0011230941,0.001240246,0.000735093],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007639865,0.00048459874,0.00057213433,0.00090732326,0.002587221,0.00061277504,0.0036696154,0.00041855278,0.0007929902],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0016216816,0.0003389155,0.00017832292,0.0044785514,0.001454998,0.0010306793,0.0009211413,0.0023554985,0.00051583175],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0018133704,0.0021960747,0.25450936,0.00023324027,0.0003611711,0.0012589176,0.054774877,0.012549373,0.0006196241,0.04223779,0.6012924,0.02815387],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0015357068,0.0002041577,0.17665416,0.00029647275,0.000046919657,0.000015587215,0.01731765,0.00011909502,0.00007474337,0.0010693265,0.80202544,0.0006407332],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.017749334,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.18071458,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.20073311,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00094407384,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008752845,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999461},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1548391596","doi":"10.1017/cbo9780511619533.004","title":"Scripts, Stories, and Anchored Narratives","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Scripting language; Narrative; Linguistics; History; Literature; Art; Computer science; Philosophy; Programming language","score_opus":0.07360399959314541,"score_gpt":0.28899710928594957,"score_spread":0.21539310969280417,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1548391596","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00029442203,0.0011766102,0.00033486448,0.000047989863,0.0005127997,0.0003438857,0.00010809008,0.00018866459,0.99699265],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0015052062,0.00052139163,0.00044788586,0.000087902095,0.00029740433,3.1182543e-7,0.000011862561,0.00003594478,0.99709207],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99820703,0.000075535856,0.0001855495,0.00056722254,0.0005964989,0.00036813316],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998588,0.00017032615,0.00024614573,0.00033224202,0.00038092965,0.0002823526],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004059291,0.00031451313,0.00038294235,0.00025752137,0.0008610564,0.0001342269,0.0005469916,0.000518477,0.000016909984],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000078026336,0.00037951904,0.00009922063,0.00002250844,0.0012474953,0.0002084575,0.00028236705,0.00045338442,0.000009978096],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000068468704,0.0000046632167,0.0000038555354,0.00003239713,0.000052523814,0.00015516732,0.0026974094,8.7682665e-8,0.000005529424,0.94191104,0.047086664,0.007982197],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00024734493,0.000030994448,0.000027395854,0.00013819044,0.00005910489,0.0000031212198,0.002395351,4.1454877e-7,0.000024101832,0.00017076205,0.996507,0.00039620325],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00042104215,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001847056,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94942033,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00027402857,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00037672833,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99986565},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1551042345","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.996426","title":"Time to Deliberate: Factors Influencing the Duration of Jury Deliberation","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Duration (music); Deliberation; Psychology; Political science; Law; Social psychology; Politics; Art","score_opus":0.013533875872541973,"score_gpt":0.30863317874133606,"score_spread":0.2950993028687941,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1551042345","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98176837,0.00037215938,0.013624476,0.0013131987,0.00014439083,0.00015470655,6.4896574e-7,0.000031856584,0.0025901832],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9965503,0.00017305091,0.00014573065,0.0002074257,0.00027344827,0.0000011612054,0.0000010281193,0.000012400374,0.0026354166],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9974738,0.00014533901,0.0004482959,0.0001296933,0.0006401641,0.0011627569],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99884236,0.00027079065,0.00025889234,0.00011628359,0.00042243343,0.00008922445],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006310165,0.00009809208,0.000120278484,0.00015360535,0.0007486258,0.00011500928,0.00036108907,0.00008035535,0.00011137274],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00078096724,0.00006991021,0.00006298786,0.00061416684,0.00008341568,0.00042637516,0.000025322099,0.0006327845,0.00009249364],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00032616756,0.00013350026,0.0021292376,0.0000102812655,0.00019032015,0.0000046214586,0.05341419,0.0017874659,0.01985838,0.20395666,0.002415375,0.7157738],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0017696039,0.0018019807,0.07218729,0.00027237495,0.00027342743,0.00023089281,0.1746984,0.00016469226,0.02593127,0.55884606,0.16207305,0.0017509751],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000089911504,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003365785,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7140228,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006987298,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0023855,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.57579},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1576040236","doi":"","title":"Science on Law's Terms: Implications of Procedural Legitimacy on Scientific Evidence","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Library and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Legitimacy; Argument (complex analysis); Consistency (knowledge bases); Law and economics; Damages; Law; Political science; Liability; Scientific evidence; Epistemology; Sociology; Philosophy; Computer science","score_opus":0.021120698691359657,"score_gpt":0.25249768547385176,"score_spread":0.2313769867824921,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1576040236","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3457555,0.00014173961,0.00001315366,0.009574987,0.00036654904,0.000230771,0.00006269967,0.00001298676,0.6438416],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99391884,0.000026966014,0.00038223344,0.0013237066,0.00005777196,0.0000058957125,5.968074e-7,0.000007098782,0.0042768875],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9964186,0.00005227507,0.0002209484,0.00025089597,0.0026646869,0.0003925836],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986237,0.0006328486,0.00017614804,0.00025357152,0.00000346496,0.00031024046],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00009531597,0.00010428417,0.00013612458,0.00006383074,0.0008514509,0.00008150847,0.0005644154,0.00001474483,0.00003255215],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009012046,0.000093875045,0.000018545703,0.00046083654,0.0011365945,0.0013025722,0.00011350823,0.00008420469,1.8003572e-8],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006567042,0.000052469637,0.0084340675,0.000042385145,0.00000460762,0.0000010714217,0.00054581923,0.000013629538,0.0100622745,0.97318804,0.00089250447,0.0066974508],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003326851,0.00028338973,0.43963048,0.0011425257,0.00002940745,0.0000045507827,0.009395505,0.00008104741,0.3086544,0.0216388,0.218175,0.00063222897],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0016325312,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.015757546,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.95154923,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000019401086,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0046306197,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.879308},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1577887210","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2358306","title":"The Schleswig-Holstein Question of the Criminal Law Finally Resolved? An Examination of South Australia's New Approach to the Use of Bad Character Evidence in Criminal Proceedings.","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"British Columbia Institute of Technology","funders":"","keywords":"Character (mathematics); Law; Criminal law; Criminal procedure; Political science; Criminology; Psychology; Sociology; Mathematics","score_opus":0.1502954172577319,"score_gpt":0.35749672590371884,"score_spread":0.20720130864598693,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1577887210","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9961845,0.00024323219,0.001015296,0.0016110935,0.000100255595,0.00054629584,0.0000013314958,0.000007777242,0.00029018585],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99735343,0.0002430691,0.00058549055,0.000065555665,0.00018539403,0.000016035267,3.954086e-7,0.000012825353,0.0015377848],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99647415,0.0005361287,0.0006601541,0.00024216704,0.0011371294,0.00095027784],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99772453,0.00032310144,0.0007244358,0.00026567254,0.00087397854,0.00008827664],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0073975716,0.00015151477,0.00021665885,0.00012261859,0.0004822089,0.0002532681,0.0012898371,0.00011251617,0.00001762552],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0023071265,0.00008405583,0.00009890083,0.0006759698,0.0003923361,0.0012518251,0.000088992754,0.001047921,0.000005933992],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00034076042,0.0002606212,0.0062536937,0.00008102773,0.000047782516,3.0066926e-7,0.051668793,0.00036175412,0.003592462,0.8394737,0.0003301355,0.09758896],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007532767,0.0012922251,0.8562708,0.0014926585,0.0002816889,0.000079609825,0.07928288,0.0003262599,0.00398189,0.05235875,0.003378511,0.0005014387],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0032195868,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007995939,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.85001713,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00033595302,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00172669,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.48670736},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1592768569","doi":"","title":"Jury Trials for Violent Hate Crimes in Russia: Is Russian Justice Only for Ethnic Russians","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Chicago-Kent law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Section (typography); Law; Political science; Hung jury; Economic Justice; Supreme court; Jury selection; Legislation; Criminology; Sociology; Advertising; Business","score_opus":0.37519597917124564,"score_gpt":0.4795894323707514,"score_spread":0.10439345319950577,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1592768569","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0014482734,0.69506013,0.008920206,0.043358788,0.005411298,0.022577131,0.0006414088,0.0006819915,0.22190079],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.17008476,0.71276325,0.034410704,0.06852058,0.0026302557,0.0050573447,0.000112271104,0.0003371674,0.006083694],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9951722,0.00079840777,0.0016977941,0.00082431216,0.0006184238,0.0008888816],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9963236,0.0017209442,0.0007910425,0.0006713824,0.00018498342,0.0003080625],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0087821,0.00041032294,0.0015471793,0.00013318298,0.00062306045,0.00011310927,0.0010561579,0.00030073457,0.0009007914],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004118957,0.00032016556,0.00070464564,0.0006972225,0.00033909417,0.00038313502,0.00010618767,0.00028941283,0.00016628683],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00012493425,0.0002832848,0.000017562532,0.004903318,0.000060961527,0.000005287484,0.0028906562,2.9297442e-7,0.000006280468,0.79701215,0.016476134,0.17821914],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008582442,0.00014822654,0.00062012754,0.0065508257,0.0007801723,0.0000027709184,0.00027969666,0.0000042551583,0.00014457872,0.03832176,0.95182514,0.00046421005],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002984573,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0014730118,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.935349,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00015660442,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007148889,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999925},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1608436198","doi":"10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0630","title":"Language of Jury Instructions","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Blame; Adversarial system; Jury trial; Hung jury; Law; Jury instructions; Context (archaeology); Political science; Psychology; Civil procedure; Social psychology; History","score_opus":0.014919323768558104,"score_gpt":0.3111204251866301,"score_spread":0.296201101418072,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1608436198","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0000698696,0.00094669627,0.000048515074,0.000016309767,0.002545505,0.00027661945,0.000093011564,0.000106299245,0.9958972],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.06706193,0.0044602277,0.013348556,0.000062854786,0.01333826,0.000030745356,0.000029787976,0.0004386614,0.90122896],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986431,0.000043304706,0.00035207882,0.00016166997,0.0005446029,0.00025522566],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99835426,0.00037744737,0.00060948246,0.00047658104,0.00011201918,0.00007020992],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00046253635,0.00017251236,0.0003546734,0.00016516507,0.00011168094,0.000009127938,0.0006792175,0.0002803369,0.0019982697],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013647118,0.00013558324,0.00007162114,0.00026217336,0.0006614077,0.0000049560995,0.0001048454,0.00024289568,0.00012527099],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000016304797,0.00008337177,0.0000260216,0.0001864492,0.00007004487,0.0000010832526,0.013726537,0.0000054925204,0.0000058739547,0.63162816,0.30383715,0.05041348],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007058789,0.000005728411,0.000027438367,0.00005181174,0.00011121167,1.3676542e-7,0.0021208208,1.6697344e-7,0.00002778351,0.0046409583,0.9928062,0.00013714336],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00038673225,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003674855,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6889691,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000021472772,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00029435594,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99891406},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1613606969","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1276","title":"The Jury Vetting Cases: New Insights on Jury Trials in Criminal Cases?","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Vetting; Supreme court; Jury selection; Law; Hung jury; Political science; Jury trial","score_opus":0.18230540148100322,"score_gpt":0.4307519436095716,"score_spread":0.24844654212856837,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1613606969","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.078819886,0.7055604,0.00007713594,0.05723127,0.003848093,0.008581435,0.000019570329,0.00045023885,0.14541198],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.77118766,0.20760234,0.00069702894,0.014408549,0.0017043549,0.00032979663,0.000008505077,0.00007125842,0.0039904914],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9944524,0.0021943017,0.0012936096,0.00047005553,0.0009986826,0.00059096294],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98886216,0.009342555,0.0005535801,0.0006470644,0.00032608444,0.00026858572],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.007511568,0.0002705408,0.0009040287,0.000074141026,0.00090233266,0.00043481725,0.00085625745,0.00013094467,0.0009940017],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023355588,0.00017317395,0.00027228985,0.00066127564,0.00027721116,0.00051806186,0.000109133085,0.00036328004,0.0011307151],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004098565,0.000092707756,0.000035041583,0.0008523017,0.0000313908,0.00019722464,0.0018729637,0.0000025391098,0.000016991227,0.19992365,0.21721312,0.5797211],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00019229755,0.00007629301,0.00015103756,0.0041574184,0.00008927586,0.000019931409,0.00048415927,0.0000015725312,0.000021440292,0.0068875067,0.98768216,0.00023689892],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0037606624,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0066696294,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.77046907,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00016693828,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007133106,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99991924},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1733669877","doi":"10.17589/2309-8678-2014-2-2-9-62","title":"Selection of Jurors and Lay Assessors in Comparative Perspective: Eurasian Context","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Russian Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Impartiality; Adjudication; Legislation; Law; Context (archaeology); Political science; Listing (finance); Independence (probability theory); Selection (genetic algorithm); Choice of law; Sociology; Conflict of laws; Business; Computer science","score_opus":0.09771499217999599,"score_gpt":0.42114002194790534,"score_spread":0.3234250297679093,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1733669877","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6252191,0.0005904467,0.00028925666,0.0039065457,0.00034604353,0.00016037667,0.0000031690456,0.000029843859,0.36945525],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99894154,0.00003579013,0.0006436287,0.0000660744,0.00012220071,0.0000012265084,1.462597e-7,0.0000065452964,0.00018283798],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99856573,0.00038484123,0.00026029404,0.00014087501,0.00044036025,0.00020788664],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991423,0.00012663512,0.00021869356,0.000049703223,0.00025800825,0.00020467103],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011681553,0.00008700096,0.00022410008,0.00014545076,0.000323712,0.00013364495,0.0001556444,0.00007038716,0.00008026534],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002780774,0.000076072385,0.000033679717,0.00044697206,0.00034234585,0.0004951723,0.00001957796,0.00029730957,0.000009331885],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00008753616,0.0000935197,0.014152299,0.0000043386685,0.000023068358,0.000019471505,0.05344448,0.000024104294,0.000029315568,0.9267239,0.00070103974,0.0046969526],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0034093533,0.0006395458,0.2289086,0.00035542433,0.000053491898,0.00029711553,0.48638058,0.000104303836,0.0008911976,0.16974998,0.108587265,0.000623129],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001400304,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.021888908,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7569739,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002248785,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00033004346,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99595904},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1779415873","doi":"10.4000/pipss.1533","title":"Trial by Jury in Russian Military Courts","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Journal of power institutions in post-soviet societies","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council; Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Chechen; Law; Impartiality; Military justice; Political science; Independence (probability theory); Jury trial; Economic Justice; Criminology; Sociology","score_opus":0.05356442718386808,"score_gpt":0.3646865234803353,"score_spread":0.31112209629646725,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1779415873","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.94377244,0.009320142,0.00015978402,0.016358871,0.0023745147,0.00039873045,0.000031715466,0.000029069293,0.027554756],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99163,0.005597951,0.00048361364,0.0009492144,0.00022420971,0.0000059308486,0.0000017565196,0.00001076119,0.0010965309],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.997122,0.0005621939,0.0008236008,0.0001344114,0.0009672362,0.00039055294],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998587,0.00053072633,0.00028773618,0.00022515246,0.00026536544,0.00010402226],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0034777282,0.00016253548,0.00034188043,0.00024389292,0.0009504217,0.000033957393,0.00085842115,0.00018723482,0.0002635223],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013984836,0.00011897435,0.00018785555,0.0006977498,0.0018606732,0.00074489345,0.00007861594,0.0007292743,0.00002544948],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.009083538,0.0020939193,0.002624433,0.00003921464,0.00017513552,0.00032546557,0.381199,0.0015064223,0.00025550788,0.058344416,0.54004496,0.0043080137],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.027375333,0.001507401,0.022797637,0.00060264877,0.00013999228,0.0004222309,0.1783916,0.000013342599,0.00017051116,0.04559317,0.72193384,0.0010523165],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00040610094,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011010044,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.20280738,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00026155182,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002466831,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7309971},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1784713775","doi":"","title":"Judges Talking To Jurors in Criminal Cases: Why U.S. Judges Do It So Differently From Just About Everyone Else","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Law; Political science; Social psychology; Criminology","score_opus":0.10335445317305295,"score_gpt":0.39372760312334826,"score_spread":0.2903731499502953,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1784713775","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92169124,0.0002469918,0.0009731471,0.059172805,0.00029522643,0.0008836059,0.00046317212,0.00032300726,0.015950805],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9846156,0.000052229767,0.0031087305,0.0033843056,0.00026218433,0.000546013,0.00034676932,0.000033200093,0.007650959],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9970623,0.00018794881,0.0005552779,0.0006913425,0.00084842084,0.0006546946],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99736625,0.00067550445,0.0001976518,0.0005963913,0.0007482072,0.00041598798],"candidate_categories":["scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00040637996,0.0002550125,0.00030584392,0.00049430964,0.0009589012,0.0017695661,0.001150408,0.00019287874,0.0051733647],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004064279,0.00024274262,0.000099009885,0.0016684098,0.0002703258,0.0014727203,0.00024545094,0.00028196268,0.0020736519],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000012635642,0.00049763394,0.052411664,0.000023511097,0.000042451724,0.000006368744,0.048631854,0.000070697686,0.00021148045,0.012070054,0.8362455,0.04977618],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021638448,0.000017733884,0.4112166,0.00004894166,0.000031871645,0.0000017045561,0.016916772,0.000025232664,0.000040218198,0.0017857325,0.56936896,0.00032988284],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007567793,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0187824,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3588049,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000297579,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00041512202,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992667},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1811161961","doi":"10.29173/cjs608","title":"The Concept of Truth Regime","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Canadian Journal of Sociology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":53,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Sociology; Epistemology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.06536626347085536,"score_gpt":0.3321888740369131,"score_spread":0.2668226105660577,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1811161961","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9109128,0.008191086,0.00006623873,0.052040126,0.0020620087,0.00011321629,0.0000073837277,0.000006819205,0.026600331],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978803,0.0001865569,0.000051620707,0.00043077633,0.00033731913,4.516359e-7,9.578645e-8,0.0000045417028,0.0011083495],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99877805,0.00043868562,0.00027034784,0.000049493534,0.0001993716,0.0002640552],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99740094,0.0015691634,0.00036284467,0.00012323393,0.0003656401,0.00017818676],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0015914942,0.000049250044,0.00015674172,0.00005268319,0.0016269225,0.000016183001,0.0007572869,0.00009651467,0.00013386372],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022532663,0.000026991731,0.00008309604,0.00012873794,0.005178061,0.000057339636,0.0000093442,0.00026657994,0.000011858443],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003670124,0.000007997357,0.0046615484,0.0000018790539,0.000102086575,0.00010806468,0.19556808,0.000064743326,0.000012394123,0.7047908,0.08285608,0.011789645],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00035891577,0.00017577759,0.022680778,0.00002303877,0.000030559095,0.00021707738,0.026783438,0.0000012017808,0.00008318894,0.20119779,0.7483322,0.00011600296],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00580962,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.053187918,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.66547614,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00011025796,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004140498,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99967283},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1861935076","doi":"10.1002/tht3.163","title":"Sensitivity, Causality, and Statistical Evidence in Courts of Law","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Thought A Journal of Philosophy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":70,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"Université de Montréal; University of Glasgow; European Commission","keywords":"Causation; Impossibility; Sensitivity (control systems); Causality (physics); Rest (music); Counterexample; Statistical evidence; Epistemology; Modal; Econometrics; Positive economics; Economics; Mathematical economics; Law; Philosophy; Political science; Mathematics","score_opus":0.2065072938505597,"score_gpt":0.42507689479463623,"score_spread":0.21856960094407654,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1861935076","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9014356,0.006666383,0.0067947167,0.027391873,0.0010839368,0.00034639385,0.00003569358,0.000032463384,0.056212917],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9955629,0.00014758753,0.0037080126,0.0001830653,0.00036598937,3.114731e-7,1.2098043e-7,0.000006910255,0.00002511486],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977532,0.0006092034,0.00046106376,0.00011272138,0.00089605333,0.00016775576],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974045,0.0013907691,0.0003417589,0.00009894972,0.00055021205,0.0002137693],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004712527,0.00008338637,0.00032444965,0.00012962683,0.000059456805,0.000046743666,0.00016858142,0.00006686665,0.00001611929],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0030163876,0.000072145194,0.00003353251,0.0002262886,0.0005542835,0.00052219623,0.000080902195,0.000209108,0.000004366853],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00026241166,0.00014860378,0.006205111,0.000057708323,0.000018919687,0.0004421243,0.0073593725,0.000040515682,0.0001812942,0.98090434,0.0009304633,0.00344916],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00055554224,0.00025702998,0.0053314846,0.0005964676,0.000035051566,0.00010649402,0.00045279268,0.000023091787,0.00021493869,0.987391,0.0048990636,0.00013707245],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00030798983,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005528499,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09412727,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000064778964,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00039324883,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.36111155},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1905940450","doi":"10.1002/bsl.996","title":"Talking about a Black Man: The Influence of Defendant and Character Witness Race on Jurors' Use of Character Evidence","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":16,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Society for Personality and Social Psychology","keywords":"Witness; Character (mathematics); Psychology; Social psychology; Race (biology); White (mutation); Affect (linguistics); Law; Communication; Sociology; Political science; Gender studies","score_opus":0.22554423374616572,"score_gpt":0.38927827379572716,"score_spread":0.16373404004956144,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1905940450","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99735063,0.00010916277,0.000010180977,0.0013269118,0.00016719328,0.00037463542,0.000009058531,0.000025497371,0.00062675163],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987636,0.00014844659,0.00023821185,0.00054092385,0.00004413402,0.000016702632,1.9471555e-7,0.000008727129,0.00023906142],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99737215,0.00033075543,0.00040899043,0.00039461252,0.001084692,0.00040880463],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980338,0.0006987324,0.0004940193,0.00043124816,0.00025742655,0.00008476653],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002357003,0.00017205674,0.00025296918,0.00006834441,0.0008607507,0.00021500124,0.0013880011,0.00007966714,0.00008731069],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003199426,0.00009256981,0.0000754525,0.00075991073,0.007247306,0.0014971313,0.00025253562,0.00020138746,0.000018491413],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00043390508,0.0007233547,0.24183582,0.00009668727,0.000028267206,0.0000310035,0.1904181,0.00011802799,0.016118655,0.5157857,0.00016536469,0.034245152],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012957047,0.0003278005,0.9801753,0.00071878295,0.00008899601,0.00000726601,0.0027212389,0.000015124718,0.0041792733,0.003434047,0.007905407,0.0002971796],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0038441108,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0013098081,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7383395,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000024655512,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00015036706,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9954544},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1939006902","doi":"10.1002/9781118625392.wbecp075","title":"Jury Selection and Voir Dire","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"The Encyclopedia of Clinical Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Jury selection; Statutory law; Selection (genetic algorithm); Law; Constitution; Hung jury; Political science; Jury instructions; Psychology; Process (computing); Computer science; Artificial intelligence","score_opus":0.16233360463253338,"score_gpt":0.5432831920107165,"score_spread":0.38094958737818313,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1939006902","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0007370437,0.0020340383,0.000049877304,0.0026954098,0.0033271,0.0002634876,0.000016007774,0.00013174137,0.9907453],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0022923674,0.019367527,0.00071615755,0.00093098695,0.0038243786,0.000012347117,0.0000052478713,0.00015112967,0.9726999],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99728453,0.00093457743,0.0006824149,0.00043038581,0.00041227986,0.00025580346],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99735516,0.0013368569,0.0006483521,0.00037681966,0.00013341576,0.00014941428],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0033974303,0.0001685521,0.00059805124,0.000116276715,0.000094816525,0.000010737264,0.00059719605,0.00082019804,0.0014958074],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0041379044,0.000118031436,0.00009103648,0.00033034143,0.0012114326,0.000035883568,0.0000869059,0.0005471423,0.0002395642],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000040046012,0.000060107228,0.00065623445,0.0000098119845,0.000028442706,0.0000013223627,0.00035035057,8.02275e-8,1.06005e-7,0.0011226538,0.8770752,0.12065564],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00028228117,0.00010527648,0.0030197515,0.000042756452,0.000046896264,0.000001955232,0.00008275094,3.4472714e-7,4.9367312e-8,0.0135677075,0.9827247,0.00012551283],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00019000043,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0025376817,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.12053013,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000008958316,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003624276,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99941695},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1965354017","doi":"10.1007/s11896-014-9146-1","title":"Potential Motive to Fabricate and the Assessment of Child Witnesses in Sexual Assault Cases","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Allegation; Plaintiff; Credibility; Psychology; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Honesty; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.036278588096581424,"score_gpt":0.431779208465725,"score_spread":0.3955006203691436,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1965354017","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9773247,0.00017771017,0.0029597045,0.015463825,0.00019296892,0.000080968224,0.0000019842253,0.0000027552896,0.0037953458],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99723446,0.00014686327,0.0004922077,0.001808052,0.0002737949,0.0000016898376,1.0323914e-7,0.0000049887935,0.000037827664],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99856246,0.00041689523,0.00037397808,0.00013553619,0.0003266846,0.00018446588],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99873275,0.0005211873,0.00032450756,0.00009197478,0.00022961036,0.00009995735],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016980491,0.00008503599,0.00029668672,0.00020655396,0.00013999244,0.0000397364,0.00023634906,0.000076505574,0.000016707694],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00044684004,0.000056208683,0.000033249242,0.00021258368,0.00051136804,0.00013085875,0.000045522167,0.00023394884,9.671428e-7],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0054800347,0.001816365,0.08801726,0.00032234954,0.0003973881,0.00022398606,0.2218487,0.0004950693,0.0047912207,0.119111404,0.016740372,0.54075587],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0033763913,0.0017805384,0.9106189,0.00012745403,0.00021731078,0.0010239583,0.061028082,0.00003219288,0.00009380618,0.008092176,0.013389556,0.00021961064],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0016101414,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000844361,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8226017,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000013689175,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000070989176,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24340628},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1975357052","doi":"10.1163/15718174-22022043","title":"The Nature of the Russian Trial by Jury","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"European Journal of Crime Criminal Law and Criminal Justice","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Constitutionality; Law; Jury; Political science; Prerogative; Constitution; Jurisprudence; Russian federation; Jury trial; State (computer science); Constitutional court; Politics; Hung jury; Sociology","score_opus":0.02441380533924937,"score_gpt":0.3179624916452174,"score_spread":0.29354868630596803,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1975357052","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.48025334,0.00659429,0.001145905,0.0064678635,0.005303484,0.00035025761,0.000013467523,0.000034007207,0.4998374],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99525374,0.00030044976,0.0004070061,0.0016908728,0.0014027944,5.976004e-7,3.1984015e-7,0.000026350968,0.00091785775],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955711,0.0020094996,0.0007559276,0.00020165498,0.0010933949,0.0003684754],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9968989,0.0013133541,0.0008549749,0.00031402597,0.0003933052,0.00022543402],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0052175466,0.00019874911,0.0003052541,0.000050788447,0.0015520351,0.00028983582,0.001325642,0.00008470775,0.000030314884],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002372026,0.00011072691,0.00020666051,0.00018560777,0.00130958,0.000280871,0.00015404829,0.00085440313,0.000010452267],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0070691085,0.00016114466,0.000004417645,0.00024850108,0.000052218187,0.000041354353,0.009539779,0.000004170802,0.00042635953,0.9233339,0.013905315,0.045213763],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0047928574,0.0013415053,0.0011456418,0.00030358564,0.002951411,0.000142955,0.02374923,0.000004799815,0.0010951153,0.0039122333,0.96026856,0.0002921167],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000029650311,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000026846506,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9463632,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000028156479,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00019948637,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997478},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1989236958","doi":"10.1093/lpr/mgq001","title":"Recent trends in evidence law in China and the new evidence scholarship","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law Probability and Risk","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Scholarship; Interdependence; Status quo; China; Modernization theory; Empirical evidence; Perspective (graphical); Positive economics; Law; Political science; Scientific evidence; Sociology; Epistemology; Economics; Philosophy","score_opus":0.07071523477077973,"score_gpt":0.3721160392842198,"score_spread":0.3014008045134401,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1989236958","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97253704,0.0061417604,0.000006360311,0.016091196,0.00018383868,0.00033566882,0.0000014613868,0.000032434953,0.0046702116],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98835856,0.010221976,0.0008834714,0.00024452375,0.00007073974,0.00001633991,1.5054074e-7,0.0000045578545,0.00019966892],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978076,0.00083994825,0.00029427026,0.0004258613,0.0003574236,0.00027485396],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9975962,0.0017975774,0.000097979115,0.00032879706,0.000058844736,0.000120612814],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007885765,0.00011253796,0.00020519842,0.000044463955,0.00048188097,0.00028186294,0.00037545615,0.00015175731,0.000107436164],"category_scores_gemma":[0.006428221,0.000073647694,0.000027099211,0.0006376059,0.0016249209,0.00096602435,0.0001347029,0.00073611,0.000004673024],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00022743663,0.000048729813,0.12372735,0.000023664259,0.000002618276,0.0000020033087,0.010194121,0.000007980479,0.000010181064,0.5724133,0.000032786782,0.2933098],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005491067,0.000029214178,0.3595211,0.00023306791,0.00001143719,0.000001681284,0.00013053195,0.000015605237,0.000029245399,0.60803837,0.03131154,0.00012910116],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.030968769,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5974595,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5664907,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000046103865,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00013433273,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9754841},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1996358874","doi":"10.1007/s10979-005-8122-9","title":"Racial Bias in Mock Juror Decision-Making: A Meta-Analytic Review of Defendant Treatment.","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"review","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":321,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Regina","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Jury; Racial bias; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Empirical research; Meta-analysis; In-group favoritism; White (mutation); Racism; Criminology; Social group; Law; Political science; Epistemology","score_opus":0.3653564970084659,"score_gpt":0.5213447118406104,"score_spread":0.15598821483214448,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1996358874","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00008488536,0.9890373,0.0000011673452,0.000023720142,0.00011136127,0.0014140452,0.0000871425,0.000036100955,0.009204321],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0010041374,0.9961692,0.00035141388,0.00013026601,0.00016248733,0.00036006083,0.00002002442,0.000049073675,0.0017532994],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9959079,0.00054713653,0.0016104876,0.0007152277,0.0007967464,0.00042249393],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99719477,0.0009680436,0.0009455701,0.0005913366,0.00015361684,0.00014667239],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014139529,0.000542417,0.0039566443,0.00033369366,0.00041129565,0.00013150547,0.0006163529,0.00033283705,0.00216139],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00038778657,0.00037773774,0.0013668151,0.0006498272,0.0004031844,0.00018442182,0.000115738774,0.00027737973,0.000058013407],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000027168107,0.0002657646,0.000005818912,0.0045024995,0.00021328223,0.000059431888,0.00029898592,3.7933376e-8,2.1380746e-8,0.02533438,0.00017836387,0.9691387],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012772929,0.00008912122,0.000017266759,0.023145437,0.020939369,0.000009980927,0.000021279378,1.536635e-8,7.989956e-8,0.00079952506,0.9545198,0.00033038255],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00030103303,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009698278,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9688083,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00024183754,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005070719,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99986744},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1996910788","doi":"10.7202/1026942ar","title":"Les logiques de la rationalité judiciaire et le processus de la preuve dans le contentieux des droits des peuples autochtones : le cas des récits oraux","year":2014,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Revue générale de droit","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Université Laval; University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Political science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.04716967390503319,"score_gpt":0.3429607479423981,"score_spread":0.29579107403736493,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1996910788","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.82337,0.010009756,0.0420763,0.002628251,0.00017154288,0.00047759022,0.00006153082,0.00040524878,0.12079978],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9630344,0.0030073829,0.016432192,0.00022109754,0.00046293542,0.0001582955,0.00002230153,0.000112648595,0.016548783],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.993938,0.0027505844,0.00073194003,0.00080078986,0.00056520005,0.0012134847],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9947933,0.0030915616,0.00048760127,0.00041886128,0.00079103734,0.00041766049],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0049987365,0.0004311283,0.0007005757,0.0002344807,0.0024449246,0.0010982727,0.0010561785,0.0007911493,0.00005464385],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0064707724,0.0006105102,0.0002824079,0.00101293,0.005940801,0.0013312837,0.00021548051,0.00062590814,0.00004155354],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000699421,0.000632913,0.048074506,0.001274932,0.00012464247,0.000112680835,0.052499317,0.0018411742,0.0012660507,0.8127592,0.0005581671,0.08078647],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00077888306,0.00017012158,0.12413747,0.001711187,0.00015674667,0.00042611445,0.011710998,0.001272965,0.004613454,0.834108,0.020160558,0.000753532],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.048340622,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05904385,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.13966437,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012282109,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0031170023,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99993867},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2010509409","doi":"10.1007/s10979-010-9232-6","title":"After 30 years, what do we know about what jurors know? A meta-analytic review of lay knowledge regarding eyewitness factors.","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"review","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":92,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Jurisdiction; Sample (material); Eyewitness testimony; Function (biology); Law","score_opus":0.13185254156641243,"score_gpt":0.4401069547092262,"score_spread":0.30825441314281377,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2010509409","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001662913,0.99543315,6.767162e-7,0.000038544316,0.000999547,0.0013345801,0.00005325925,0.00007505481,0.0018989119],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.00037114174,0.9917935,0.000046734334,0.00007975033,0.0002891597,0.00042815908,0.000033314136,0.00010780292,0.006850441],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9952751,0.0007020367,0.0014747842,0.0010265129,0.0009126481,0.00060891727],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99657625,0.0004973249,0.0010870629,0.0010652974,0.00045025704,0.0003238367],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020172668,0.000767681,0.0042698774,0.00029462882,0.00054735737,0.0015466795,0.0011165428,0.00074072083,0.00413525],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00016013448,0.0005666926,0.0017377469,0.000610165,0.0009363575,0.0015782904,0.00033835202,0.0009103918,0.00015980465],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000011635555,0.00013559392,0.000008592383,0.023256795,0.0003053995,0.000028069682,0.0012180718,3.4449739e-9,2.1749867e-7,0.016247032,0.0003332596,0.9584658],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007070928,0.00002695303,0.00001872165,0.11623445,0.019481532,0.0000047587605,0.00024412977,3.806788e-9,8.7118394e-7,0.00017600722,0.86320627,0.0005356097],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000093044255,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0013208751,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9579302,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00010754598,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00042973558,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99967843},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2014369379","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.2012.es07","title":"Canadian Jury Research: The Contributions of Anthony N. Doob","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Commission; Relevance (law); Law; Empirical research; Hung jury; Political science; Psychology; Sociology; Criminology; Epistemology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.20008069848706445,"score_gpt":0.4061150835632851,"score_spread":0.20603438507622063,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2014369379","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9488672,0.0036971457,0.000523423,0.03110957,0.00086419174,0.00038746654,0.00009412615,0.0000205493,0.014436334],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.993847,0.001482581,0.0013410974,0.0021097728,0.0005229673,0.000031923893,0.0000053586677,0.00003458654,0.000624677],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9936412,0.0020539013,0.00089385855,0.00041710236,0.00030037994,0.002693548],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98698515,0.00551169,0.00051541394,0.0005214774,0.0032647115,0.0032015475],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00702903,0.00032286186,0.0006250587,0.0014508509,0.002167717,0.00030636395,0.0017035963,0.0007267308,0.00055612804],"category_scores_gemma":[0.030826563,0.0002906609,0.00016935935,0.00047271856,0.0037477538,0.000510898,0.000080731596,0.0020263544,0.000038044367],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00012718918,0.00008517764,0.0016425741,0.0011905442,0.00022293827,0.0032457276,0.12163135,0.0002847304,0.00087345124,0.78137994,0.03516008,0.05415633],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00090893445,0.00085589953,0.07339736,0.0006296171,0.005903314,0.0049569528,0.69478154,0.000096801974,0.00052558305,0.07376521,0.14337115,0.0008076096],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6385818,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9060341,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7076147,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0021136033,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.025956944,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999546},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2019577695","doi":"10.2224/sbp.2003.31.3.301","title":"MOCK JUROR RATINGS OF GUILT IN CANADA: MODERN RACISM AND ETHNIC HERITAGE","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Social Behavior and Personality An International Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":54,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Regina","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Jury; Social psychology; Ethnic group; Criminology; Law","score_opus":0.09372123689097184,"score_gpt":0.4054508314848601,"score_spread":0.31172959459388827,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2019577695","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99630946,0.00022305668,0.000024490439,0.0009896738,0.0003464275,0.00006983651,0.000040590545,0.00000544817,0.001990998],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989874,0.00015921044,0.0003046369,0.0001636146,0.00016405038,0.0000043481905,0.0000022449913,0.000007174098,0.00020734404],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.998236,0.00029546625,0.00031703146,0.00016751116,0.00079294224,0.00019104208],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992032,0.00010878367,0.00018253236,0.000054581866,0.00032074147,0.00013017353],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010287422,0.00009337914,0.00017136063,0.00007381047,0.0003511438,0.00012410208,0.00032330406,0.00008393041,0.0002763267],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004646762,0.00009825174,0.000044305358,0.000114129056,0.00020717233,0.00044273646,0.000040380564,0.00029710645,3.318915e-7],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00012956948,0.0003007,0.7025442,0.000020787098,0.000056600005,0.00018756502,0.100392886,0.000006214274,0.0009081189,0.03307173,0.00039339322,0.16198821],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00056938117,0.000030018984,0.9670457,0.000026075904,0.000021943755,0.000050116727,0.016007807,0.000012932044,0.000039745133,0.0147955315,0.0012373793,0.00016334187],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.208536,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6911775,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.48264152,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002844824,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013350764,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.79673445},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2029409435","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2013.01.011","title":"Mock juror sensitivity to forensic evidence in drug facilitated sexual assaults","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Plaintiff; Conviction; Psychology; Test (biology); Sexual assault; Poison control; Injury prevention; Suicide prevention; Human factors and ergonomics; Clinical psychology; Medicine; Medical emergency; Law","score_opus":0.044887028092082025,"score_gpt":0.37290144285292426,"score_spread":0.32801441476084225,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2029409435","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9668131,0.0003089103,0.00019010404,0.025447939,0.0020794228,0.00010035004,0.0000071409545,0.0000102493295,0.0050427904],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9951284,0.000039420822,0.0021168499,0.0016176819,0.00038029003,0.0000017462941,4.1819763e-7,0.000004902766,0.0007103086],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9984096,0.00022160624,0.00036315224,0.00013887802,0.0007135532,0.00015318298],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983416,0.000567977,0.0001745821,0.00006426031,0.00071013847,0.00014139514],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013120602,0.00008191463,0.00014693875,0.00015344127,0.00010504356,0.00016957395,0.0002609583,0.000050974322,0.000093360766],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00069572503,0.000071148905,0.000039543578,0.00014150506,0.00010284255,0.0007171505,0.00004466388,0.00022583254,0.00004822326],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0013396945,0.00093663845,0.30667278,0.00009150254,0.0004279367,0.0003759882,0.065116934,0.00094665,0.002234087,0.25219998,0.13891411,0.23074369],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0023685498,0.00052200304,0.6027639,0.0019285914,0.00004847927,0.00035702134,0.02043732,0.00015292427,0.00021214328,0.24513234,0.12522665,0.0008500676],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0021787088,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0099845035,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.2960911,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000057292316,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00021806084,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5571587},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2032126517","doi":"10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00516.x","title":"The Influence of Identification Decision and DNA Evidence on Juror Decision Making<sup>1</sup>","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Credibility; Witness; Reliability (semiconductor); Identification (biology); Eyewitness identification; Social psychology; Dna testing; Perception; Computer science; Law; Genetics; Data mining; Political science","score_opus":0.04487340792176357,"score_gpt":0.4337711459297325,"score_spread":0.3888977380079689,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2032126517","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99038905,0.00032368195,0.002100756,0.0038413273,0.00027983656,0.00020062078,0.0000013504482,0.000015043936,0.0028483102],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99583924,0.00093982846,0.0015963162,0.0012374716,0.00035148184,0.000002648728,1.0651729e-7,0.00000995826,0.000022955024],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99716735,0.0001952884,0.0009859115,0.00027761006,0.0010804373,0.00029341277],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99488467,0.003016865,0.0011797906,0.0002505959,0.00057975494,0.00008832717],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0039177914,0.00014449237,0.0003413874,0.00022864346,0.0009064206,0.00014204645,0.00087611546,0.00025030994,0.000019542913],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0028848802,0.000108285094,0.00010931973,0.0006234762,0.00058739266,0.0003022129,0.00004226614,0.00039417535,0.000023127],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0021593082,0.00012928557,0.00011964133,0.0000049912255,0.00002020058,0.0000075949,0.007663755,0.00041728688,0.003327414,0.035402562,0.005914608,0.94483334],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008622407,0.00051067997,0.4027754,0.00034621128,0.00005745116,0.000019770638,0.0026423577,0.0000092384735,0.00018812835,0.57181174,0.020548726,0.00022804587],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0000016584773,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000011308939,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9446053,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007800373,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00017266626,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6971546},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2035722625","doi":"10.2202/1554-4567.1027","title":"Finding Facts Fairly in Roberts and Zuckerman's Criminal Evidence","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Commentary on Evidence","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Conviction; Rationality; Context (archaeology); Legitimacy; Psychology; Subject (documents); Epistemology; Doctrine; Credibility; Philosophy of law; Law; Political science; Philosophy; Computer science; Comparative law","score_opus":0.13551182210945284,"score_gpt":0.4373198992100908,"score_spread":0.30180807710063795,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2035722625","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.82286394,0.0013254795,0.00026010783,0.17066939,0.0006364095,0.00024023274,0.000005830472,0.00006411976,0.003934489],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98353416,0.0011298842,0.001111607,0.013378587,0.0003687784,0.0000156456,0.0000022008521,0.000008463756,0.00045069418],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99800205,0.0001759115,0.0003021874,0.00035986834,0.0008956994,0.0002642701],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973885,0.0021340977,0.00011438231,0.00014835023,0.000108811066,0.00010586718],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009899676,0.00013442108,0.00012820559,0.00023573391,0.00023496803,0.0002090497,0.0006715016,0.00005516427,0.00048825474],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0016383412,0.00013880282,0.00003504285,0.00019372691,0.00016059488,0.0019615886,0.00016314584,0.00022463656,0.00010845898],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00067425566,0.0004685969,0.28052902,0.00007525374,0.000058954483,0.0002086845,0.033212658,0.0016715688,0.00057255314,0.019085133,0.10285548,0.5605878],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0011479744,0.0004594676,0.34612817,0.01032805,0.000054027903,0.000041654195,0.006344674,0.0021255023,0.00214812,0.007926,0.6220753,0.0012210233],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0012901961,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0039298683,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5593668,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00042261984,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007388769,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.56602144},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2045988882","doi":"10.1353/tlj.2004.0006","title":"A New Approach to Old Cases: Reconsidering Statutes of Limitation","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Toronto Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Statute; Principal (computer security); Maximization; Political science; Rules of evidence; Computer science; Law; Psychology; Law and economics; Economics; Social psychology; Computer security","score_opus":0.06766223257713491,"score_gpt":0.2926820225917903,"score_spread":0.2250197900146554,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2045988882","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.36283118,0.0010060398,0.09446109,0.0017772188,0.0004764829,0.00037307222,0.00001622416,0.00006832921,0.5389904],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.87087715,0.00017353032,0.12750159,0.00004134981,0.00006203528,1.8777705e-8,4.3153187e-7,0.000003895023,0.0013399979],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99926454,0.000053344273,0.00012837329,0.000100310295,0.00031782032,0.00013561634],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99922854,0.00011481741,0.0001713375,0.00008121094,0.00023255963,0.00017152542],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00037410462,0.000051568204,0.00013094688,0.000036497262,0.00038463867,0.00003190456,0.00025672137,0.000046471916,0.00032554934],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002093973,0.000059893337,0.00006162146,0.00007092235,0.000089842644,0.0006589899,0.000038304,0.00006633333,0.000007377459],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00039709464,0.0003583185,0.00077888195,0.00007516057,0.00016189727,0.000109535074,0.34989023,0.00854192,0.0005452891,0.5511828,0.011647568,0.07631128],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0037213634,0.0006315505,0.006885782,0.000682912,0.00019404262,0.00017417596,0.50045645,0.000017162882,0.001149604,0.036083687,0.44932556,0.0006776703],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07550656,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.16646004,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.53765035,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00031398196,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00035902066,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9306497},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2050115964","doi":"10.1163/157181809x458544","title":"The Competency of Children to Testify: Psychological Research Informing Canadian Law Reform","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The International Journal of Children s Rights","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":23,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University; McGill University; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Oath; Competence (human resources); Law; Psychology; Cross-examination; Meaning (existential); Political science; Sociology; Social psychology; Psychotherapist","score_opus":0.045855168649857246,"score_gpt":0.42416054779884,"score_spread":0.37830537914898277,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2050115964","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9115081,0.000063659434,0.000013975353,0.017985055,0.0011223435,0.00019889086,0.000015433465,0.000008977911,0.06908359],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99748874,0.000034874047,0.00064394675,0.00047793993,0.0010691204,0.0000020446853,0.0000016288634,0.0000068694626,0.000274846],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9968152,0.00017434517,0.0005462746,0.00012279069,0.0019886594,0.00035271145],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9964522,0.0008807811,0.000316452,0.00026327345,0.0018191957,0.00026808202],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0051471465,0.00009567586,0.00015046519,0.00027681162,0.001226815,0.00028760845,0.0030243248,0.0000933585,0.00015840105],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011699906,0.000045686764,0.0001004249,0.00037392846,0.0008001769,0.00029298395,0.00013190857,0.00087182916,0.000058031303],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013193513,0.00008338182,0.005981887,4.978317e-7,0.00014617246,0.000017984581,0.0038660103,0.000020714771,0.00021474481,0.95819485,0.0046066027,0.02673522],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008236979,0.00035540658,0.43095747,0.00018461465,0.00003119809,0.00087911414,0.0006238031,0.0000070104866,0.0018076502,0.29420418,0.26981026,0.00031560846],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.097426176,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5173539,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6639907,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00018622569,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006492247,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9435793},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2051342016","doi":"10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01903.x","title":"Replications and Limitations of a Two‐Factor Model of Child Witness Credibility","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":85,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Honesty; Credibility; Psychology; Verdict; Social psychology; Recreation; Cognition; Perception; Developmental psychology; Law","score_opus":0.16571623323978743,"score_gpt":0.4375798531237976,"score_spread":0.2718636198840102,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2051342016","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.83495504,0.00014744002,0.016084304,0.0042489883,0.00022918887,0.000223321,0.000017521008,0.000012880545,0.14408134],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9935991,0.00018213011,0.0058084284,0.00027191508,0.000096492804,0.0000039016177,3.2345727e-7,0.000007880074,0.00002979356],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986233,0.00012698793,0.00061373896,0.00015783503,0.00033013357,0.00014798049],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9979433,0.00046990547,0.00084655714,0.00015388371,0.0005115661,0.00007481393],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011147374,0.000076186836,0.00032589928,0.00013657573,0.0002582099,0.000011143771,0.00023644522,0.00013438788,0.000027295344],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010332139,0.000073808595,0.00008557823,0.00038043008,0.0007437118,0.00009702301,0.000015028508,0.00021193038,0.0000010459015],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00020536181,0.0005300165,0.00063469936,0.00002255543,0.00008306654,6.027072e-7,0.028237065,0.0002826344,0.0044991053,0.93702954,0.0012789831,0.027196376],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001967946,0.00013642813,0.026944114,0.000024377458,0.000106851796,0.000010107539,0.005896599,0.000029350302,0.0008014497,0.95364875,0.01022833,0.00020569871],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000005112209,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000060304166,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15864411,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000027158347,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002715602,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3009827},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2054647540","doi":"10.1023/a:1010659703309","title":"Evaluating the comprehensibility of jury instructions: A method and an example.","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":65,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury instructions; Jury; Legal psychology; Psychology; Deliberation; Comprehension; Set (abstract data type); Hearsay; Computer science; Social psychology; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.3358301573386193,"score_gpt":0.5286683274996828,"score_spread":0.19283817016106353,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2054647540","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99616045,0.00010591701,0.000084277475,0.000049227077,0.000066412686,0.00020530178,0.0000024644785,0.000030935582,0.0032950055],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9949918,0.000015201867,0.004601961,0.00008680184,0.00006676613,0.000017817783,0.0000010332215,0.000005135224,0.00021353274],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.998937,0.00030093355,0.00018387637,0.00020949176,0.00024766976,0.0001209934],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99932635,0.00021092375,0.00008163085,0.00020736746,0.000118222466,0.000055509787],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012535086,0.00006337615,0.00012340877,0.000023798379,0.0010310962,0.000090724345,0.0001268116,0.00004827477,0.00012333824],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004182688,0.000047709967,0.000019967683,0.000108159446,0.0005789255,0.0001929383,0.000051588515,0.000085649925,6.1717054e-7],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000020838126,0.00014957985,0.02336553,0.000016191523,0.000006135273,0.0000021132284,0.012509084,0.0000026775504,0.0028480792,0.62883264,0.000015030004,0.3322321],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006568842,0.00046754398,0.85087365,0.000043449712,0.00022179096,0.000028214552,0.009276513,0.000023467752,0.00019330869,0.1121874,0.025741689,0.00028609435],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0046675596,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009253642,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8275081,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000010558838,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003229623,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7930463},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2055422417","doi":"10.1080/00085030.2005.10757587","title":"DNA Evidence and Jury Comprehension","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Mount Royal University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Deliberation; Psychology; Jury selection; Jury instructions; Comprehension; Criminal justice; Jury trial; Law; Social psychology; Political science; Criminology","score_opus":0.05635951976898208,"score_gpt":0.34667288009106373,"score_spread":0.29031336032208166,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2055422417","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97564006,0.0019771117,0.00015963004,0.017211195,0.0005165412,0.000109125765,0.000002944143,0.000019571236,0.004363831],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96029025,0.001024843,0.036323622,0.0016797807,0.00036583265,5.6744136e-7,9.4327206e-8,0.000006087442,0.00030890788],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977566,0.000041013802,0.0002788979,0.00024485358,0.0010799463,0.000598699],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9978259,0.00020056129,0.0001873677,0.00016179193,0.00064674375,0.0009776294],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0030013877,0.00009754466,0.00016567229,0.00018337215,0.002106488,0.00029997918,0.00063919503,0.0000831518,0.00014700055],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007283992,0.00009104505,0.00009949794,0.0010011825,0.0036761696,0.0013477831,0.00005462155,0.00024585,0.0000118976395],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000053767626,0.0000141446,0.0045508663,0.00001402593,0.0000101858905,0.000005736384,0.023707101,0.000046358884,0.0020260534,0.0038657484,0.07602451,0.8897299],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00070859666,0.00020716232,0.13822842,0.0011707365,0.00006060793,0.00038925966,0.038950905,0.001192192,0.0070483964,0.013719465,0.79748815,0.0008361265],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00469952,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.047765885,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8888938,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005298604,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004549547,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99919266},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2058001640","doi":"10.4000/champpenal.7685","title":"Vos gènes s'il vous plaît! La banque canadienne de données génétiques et la présomption d’innocence à l'ère du risque","year":2009,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Champ pénal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Art; Philosophy","score_opus":0.022469362334648767,"score_gpt":0.3098381368264998,"score_spread":0.28736877449185105,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2058001640","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9181923,0.004220648,0.0024213677,0.030003063,0.0013482413,0.00035024784,0.000119514625,0.00031163517,0.04303298],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98473185,0.004486464,0.0018052291,0.0017343262,0.001308731,0.000024572473,0.000016256414,0.000039437866,0.005853115],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99569666,0.0012381178,0.0005277428,0.00069977826,0.0006193578,0.0012183468],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99728703,0.0011426788,0.0003044366,0.00033779928,0.00039514585,0.0005328928],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0030566272,0.0004257314,0.00045115937,0.00021616313,0.0006686944,0.0004821819,0.00079661846,0.0006189049,0.00046208623],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0014703807,0.00044772183,0.00016202753,0.000917856,0.00085561624,0.00089316885,0.00009250242,0.00068453565,0.00017163694],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00019963353,0.00083864154,0.0073083136,0.00028477938,0.000097022916,0.0010259361,0.12351901,0.0010247693,0.0017475969,0.45820165,0.031120423,0.37463224],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00053627987,0.00035368485,0.03881167,0.0009632603,0.00005991893,0.0003543709,0.0065074074,0.000863969,0.0014375569,0.07962161,0.86949384,0.0009964022],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0086495895,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.047011103,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8383734,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00056642183,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001472672,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99979746},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2067126333","doi":"10.7202/039835ar","title":"The Possibility of “Inference Causation”: Inferring Cause-in-Fact and the Nature of Legal Fact-Finding","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"McGill Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Causation; Inference; Epistemology; Plaintiff; Causal inference; Supreme court; Law; Psychology; Philosophy; Political science; Mathematics","score_opus":0.03163596699700405,"score_gpt":0.372955400710208,"score_spread":0.34131943371320395,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2067126333","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9637715,0.00014397778,0.00002492426,0.001173449,0.0005312137,0.00012478195,0.000008721274,0.000008327672,0.0342131],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9995692,0.00011461297,0.00015620624,0.00003791317,0.000061224186,0.00000136485,1.07791884e-7,0.0000050161193,0.000054366647],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99843067,0.00025756154,0.00041555276,0.00012389419,0.0005533201,0.00021902632],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99728835,0.0017871155,0.00037439988,0.0001905882,0.00029433504,0.00006523582],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0037982867,0.000084555024,0.00018271715,0.00005016456,0.002605139,0.00015744801,0.00044467772,0.00012866718,0.000044864155],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0033764539,0.000045934936,0.0000580538,0.00022733332,0.00085670024,0.00038240396,0.000080914586,0.0010195104,8.95019e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006731535,0.000022501723,0.026468543,0.00001035295,0.00001909743,0.0000045038882,0.0024317915,0.000031624913,0.00032524337,0.9592515,0.000009335468,0.011358168],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0027970178,0.00010952842,0.64961004,0.00036520182,0.00008936358,0.00012802592,0.010160911,0.00017065865,0.0062079593,0.16102989,0.16885784,0.00047359237],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0019769534,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.10610458,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.79822165,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000038256956,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000076331875,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99869335},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2084963802","doi":"10.1350/ijep.10.4.280","title":"Without Fear or Favour? Trends and Possibilities in the Canadian Approach to Expert Human Behaviour Evidence","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The International Journal of Evidence & Proof","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Skepticism; Jurisprudence; Supreme court; Law; Scientific evidence; Political science; Relevance (law); State (computer science); Rules of evidence; Law and economics; Sociology; Epistemology; Computer science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.22137268798868695,"score_gpt":0.4527667752722754,"score_spread":0.23139408728358843,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2084963802","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9292521,0.0024719017,0.00019738571,0.062751405,0.00039103415,0.0003202189,0.0000040408167,0.000011574677,0.004600336],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9942497,0.000076406846,0.00078520883,0.0010719287,0.0005990216,0.000017169275,3.0928717e-7,0.000008384406,0.0031918902],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9970645,0.0003606207,0.0004889722,0.00018677289,0.001634447,0.00026472076],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9979748,0.00080619927,0.0002785576,0.00018378434,0.0006416969,0.00011496027],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0046688844,0.00012107759,0.00017117386,0.00038739733,0.0004510037,0.0007407045,0.0020501513,0.000059351558,0.00007866348],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0020988532,0.00005977058,0.00006319647,0.00043557642,0.00031404884,0.0009381112,0.0000796013,0.00030304503,0.0000035474452],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0015096278,0.0007662597,0.38363478,0.000047242436,0.00014728835,0.0005312892,0.3310824,0.0012841771,0.0010350116,0.05493966,0.06685647,0.15816578],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010025414,0.0009267733,0.85531276,0.004808109,0.000107363216,0.00095007365,0.051306322,0.00011572624,0.00066022645,0.04476157,0.039193396,0.0008551516],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.14850801,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5165382,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.47167796,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004093134,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009019488,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8571621},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2085593820","doi":"10.2307/3505142","title":"10.2307/3505142","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Time to knit","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":51,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Philosophy of law; Divergence (linguistics); Political philosophy; Pragmatic theory of truth; Epistemology; Law; Political science; Philosophy; Sociology; Politics; Comparative law; Linguistics","score_opus":0.015754531964661634,"score_gpt":0.2741954704201217,"score_spread":0.25844093845546007,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2085593820","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0012338853,0.000052673804,0.0000013450023,0.0011123308,0.0000054197217,0.000112757894,0.0000036524298,0.00018949114,0.99728847],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0019486404,0.0000010815526,0.0002539393,0.00016343637,0.00019520626,0.00000786074,0.0000012388077,0.000011748582,0.99741685],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99895644,0.00006679008,0.00012432116,0.00019123989,0.00038854644,0.0002726754],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99942833,0.0001370024,0.00002181877,0.00018436869,0.00007367202,0.00015477679],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003640934,0.00007522019,0.00010423417,0.000058973943,0.00027079496,0.00010487374,0.00037173147,0.00005878193,0.9967618],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002960054,0.00007458452,0.00003620902,0.00045081155,0.00007464453,0.00014478923,0.00002772354,0.000058109174,0.9915522],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000015609101,0.000015840063,2.1561446e-7,9.169586e-7,0.000002329162,0.0000026271969,0.0001825636,0.000017345887,0.0000028682198,0.00003228666,0.20740479,0.79232264],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000058049194,0.00003110847,0.000045946235,0.000009635243,0.00000447729,6.652444e-7,0.00001060116,0.00000439631,0.00000979886,0.00015957645,0.9995586,0.000107130756],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000079637815,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0000035809226,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.79221547,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003774194,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000101671896,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.30414683},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2086171972","doi":"10.1111/1467-9930.00139","title":"The Underrepresentation of Indigenous Peoples on Canadian Jury Panels","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law & Policy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Indigenous; Supreme court; Law; Jury selection; Political science; Legislation; Economic Justice; Commission; Politics; Common law; Administration (probate law); Jury trial","score_opus":0.055650203733001946,"score_gpt":0.3921816795303701,"score_spread":0.33653147579736814,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2086171972","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.34370616,0.000191857,0.000011737934,0.0052032615,0.00026911742,0.0002511999,0.0000129058935,0.000036866917,0.6503169],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99565065,0.0001668108,0.000035057332,0.0010574262,0.00011967703,0.000006626717,9.78914e-7,0.000008050606,0.0029547468],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99891716,0.00018148482,0.00014245386,0.000117754615,0.000316691,0.00032446848],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99893385,0.000576889,0.00007663079,0.00020140813,0.000080539416,0.00013067121],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00040257457,0.00006143829,0.00007883747,0.000061576946,0.00095371203,0.00008866632,0.00026458196,0.000060215756,0.00006103253],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011214439,0.000047974954,0.000034513043,0.0004464692,0.00024477346,0.000077606375,0.000008675302,0.00006565464,0.00006910049],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000024912943,0.000010272578,0.00048139095,0.0000029004761,0.000005171805,0.0000011745387,0.015094471,0.000018583742,0.000009029099,0.9701985,0.00031496224,0.013861066],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001461395,0.000048991777,0.021265648,0.000023517465,0.000009711834,0.0000020253513,0.0122260535,5.757166e-7,0.0012145614,0.18942611,0.77547586,0.00016078755],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5876364,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.88237685,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7807724,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00014682232,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0023168304,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.73352784},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2088262227","doi":"10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9","title":"The impact of prejudice screening procedures on racial bias in the courtroom.","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":50,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Psychology; Prejudice (legal term); Racial bias; Adjudication; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Race (biology); Criminology; Presentation (obstetrics); White (mutation); Racism; Law; Political science; Medicine","score_opus":0.13359463668669752,"score_gpt":0.4274311957215495,"score_spread":0.29383655903485195,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2088262227","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98499864,0.00013514899,0.0000014475305,0.00014595676,0.000028015029,0.00024916822,0.0000039823244,0.000016612437,0.01442102],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99936295,0.000037868896,0.000021187296,0.000094512456,0.00009730146,0.000027898095,7.761643e-7,0.0000061309433,0.0003513579],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989723,0.00013534908,0.00016957814,0.00012840635,0.00039823737,0.00019615212],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99933016,0.00033624002,0.00009657587,0.00014062956,0.00006203239,0.000034357272],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006679218,0.000078686346,0.00010919659,0.000032464945,0.0015444411,0.00009216416,0.0003081313,0.000051404768,0.000031860916],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00015386725,0.00004241103,0.000054773176,0.000147182,0.0006153512,0.00010474977,0.000024838746,0.00013946721,0.0000025537433],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00026443473,0.00088944467,0.3180504,0.00002137856,0.000026768093,0.00008273143,0.11638134,0.000042510736,0.00043652934,0.54207605,0.0056886417,0.016039735],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00032564715,0.00025163393,0.98630154,0.000049581824,0.000021280024,0.000006637761,0.0021663576,8.396889e-7,0.0000716625,0.002309668,0.00837966,0.00011547249],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0029290917,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.013578423,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.66825116,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000017074657,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000977715,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99975544},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2093433824","doi":"10.1007/s10979-006-9068-2","title":"The impact of negative forensic evidence on mock jurors' perceptions of a trial of drug-facilitated sexual assault.","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":30,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Psychology; Sexual assault; Forensic science; Plaintiff; Legal psychology; Forensic psychology; Verdict; Clinical psychology; Social psychology; Poison control; Injury prevention; Medicine; Law; Medical emergency","score_opus":0.07711302596334052,"score_gpt":0.43853185641709397,"score_spread":0.36141883045375345,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2093433824","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9967629,0.000032841635,0.000006254064,0.000030657553,0.00007100932,0.00040511848,0.00003619373,0.000013842909,0.0026412061],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99896455,0.000010617408,0.00005353734,0.0000059030885,0.000041893563,0.000010361103,0.0000014202808,0.000005766973,0.0009059318],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986176,0.000141663,0.0003868285,0.00015691876,0.00050982076,0.00018717379],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980354,0.00108628,0.00024112378,0.00020042459,0.00037198362,0.00006482639],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012709766,0.00009361874,0.00022140422,0.00005798931,0.00045776687,0.000026406427,0.00021609283,0.00007387616,0.00008691241],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004056174,0.00006339816,0.00009734229,0.00020759921,0.0011659323,0.0001404964,0.000032291933,0.00012271955,0.0000021184512],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.024283018,0.0044206935,0.084731475,0.00017326145,0.00024361168,0.000020973408,0.26277795,0.00005132911,0.058468256,0.46635282,0.0036333513,0.09484326],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.007990277,0.0046817665,0.9381972,0.00026711018,0.0002455555,0.0000013001641,0.033047725,0.0000016983922,0.0045486116,0.010308769,0.0003744902,0.0003354986],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0066582817,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.013439678,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.85346574,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000039841634,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00011117454,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999565},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2104645711","doi":"","title":"Eyewitnesses in Criminal Trials: Lessons from the Miscarriage of Justice in Canada and Japan 1)","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Criminal justice; Conviction; Criminology; Criminal procedure; Eyewitness identification; Law; Theory of criminal justice; Punishment (psychology); Criminal law; Cross-examination; Psychology; Political science; Economic Justice; Forensic psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.10773019758677749,"score_gpt":0.40729673766112107,"score_spread":0.2995665400743436,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2104645711","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9893065,0.00017158157,0.000018296098,0.0036591429,0.00048574957,0.00012528061,0.000018621955,0.0000063876537,0.006208432],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99907404,0.00006808026,0.00037121447,0.00020030804,0.0001127919,0.000005694602,7.3023153e-7,0.0000042436795,0.00016288695],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986079,0.00033195148,0.0003528833,0.00017315711,0.00035192617,0.00018220459],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9934803,0.0061244178,0.00011954466,0.00015599634,0.000066022134,0.000053722877],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022615974,0.00007152577,0.0002511734,0.00004575106,0.00011037967,0.000049459002,0.00034996352,0.00005880555,0.00041953774],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009099463,0.000047193345,0.00001761985,0.0003068861,0.00018008798,0.0001067588,0.000049507613,0.00019366533,0.0000012579901],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00032699475,0.00023713999,0.42290726,0.00016173425,0.000044172848,0.000055544533,0.1030429,0.000086791544,0.0061937138,0.14668895,0.01322022,0.30703458],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009851598,0.000017539889,0.75356406,0.000115361145,0.00012461892,0.0000012173167,0.20489956,0.00006128942,0.0014904215,0.017300488,0.021150071,0.00029019773],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9896494,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9998171,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3306568,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004409676,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0017960399,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992473},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2108503014","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.50.3.307","title":"Deciding for Ourselves: Some Thoughts on the Psychology of Assessing Reasonable Expectations of Privacy","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Intrusiveness; Charter; Situational ethics; Context (archaeology); Perspective (graphical); Psychology; Social psychology; Law; Political science; Computer science","score_opus":0.26372173757589307,"score_gpt":0.41484189345457007,"score_spread":0.151120155878677,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2108503014","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9837195,0.0024470876,0.004510757,0.006068575,0.0006719118,0.0002433966,0.000029194418,0.000015301679,0.0022942552],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9865477,0.001275972,0.01031227,0.0010858546,0.0005833586,0.000021612697,0.0000027208814,0.000031865213,0.00013861293],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9966545,0.00077883014,0.0008403849,0.00036229508,0.00018169805,0.0011822949],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9899312,0.0069073862,0.0009668364,0.00038294418,0.0010625044,0.0007491311],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024482212,0.00027315645,0.00064349663,0.00075193355,0.0011647933,0.000063971216,0.001036027,0.00044813167,0.000029439621],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023105979,0.00024646308,0.00019215225,0.00022828508,0.0019853618,0.00042797957,0.000037440386,0.0007202027,0.0000018167245],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00051641127,0.00022753756,0.0019193371,0.0019579777,0.00027485582,0.0016039803,0.22169997,0.00082846393,0.0019301048,0.7405409,0.0067987624,0.021701645],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016835706,0.001642288,0.049325544,0.0012861831,0.008449076,0.0058742566,0.827381,0.00015205346,0.0028649773,0.07908297,0.021420624,0.0008374268],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0025609308,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.013069058,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.66145796,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004189757,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0064087124,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99999875},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2108936377","doi":"10.1093/lpr/mgt001","title":"The Eighth International Conference on Forensic Inference and Statistics","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law Probability and Risk","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Forensic science; Inference; Statistics; Computer science; Data science; History; Mathematics; Artificial intelligence; Archaeology","score_opus":0.04599391666660593,"score_gpt":0.337995040370298,"score_spread":0.292001123703692,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2108936377","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8552897,0.000309476,0.005518821,0.008965864,0.0007061934,0.0010250335,0.0001174744,0.00011622019,0.12795122],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99222714,0.0017719816,0.005334314,0.00012078173,0.000044376375,0.000019344094,0.000001403662,0.0000026882678,0.00047796138],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9991556,0.00013589277,0.00013141053,0.00018718839,0.00024707682,0.00014285903],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985638,0.00093390956,0.00007001767,0.00012780224,0.00023600008,0.000068453795],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00053561747,0.00006554974,0.00007312785,0.00000900416,0.00081181194,0.00037561727,0.0001727267,0.000049418388,0.00012780384],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000961842,0.000040084386,0.000009542606,0.000050467672,0.0011077251,0.00016811951,0.000067337736,0.00012787087,0.000025839157],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000071122654,0.000012979834,0.005114991,0.0000040870955,0.000004946235,1.56745e-7,0.000884193,0.0000014052059,7.5316535e-7,0.88122636,0.0002737822,0.11246923],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000079487465,0.000037286372,0.020094587,0.000013170644,0.0000052052224,2.749107e-7,0.00040912704,0.00038933518,0.0000069352773,0.9471051,0.031795524,0.00006398079],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0021633345,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01155389,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.13693745,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001815069,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006156118,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6447342},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2121676623","doi":"10.1348/135532507x206867","title":"The effect of a judicial declaration of competence on the perceived credibility of children and defendants","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Declaration; Credibility; Witness; Competence (human resources); Psychology; Plaintiff; Social psychology; Perception; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.0768228039220244,"score_gpt":0.39161836574622033,"score_spread":0.31479556182419594,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2121676623","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9942004,0.00025578716,0.000112661444,0.0009733209,0.00008752261,0.00018619346,0.0000036179351,0.0000081513745,0.0041723475],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9996093,0.00012269308,0.000059906786,0.00016270227,0.000032102827,0.0000019870295,3.8842148e-7,0.0000016311095,0.000009291287],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9987973,0.00039017206,0.00026075158,0.0001888134,0.00020022024,0.00016272796],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977965,0.0018061689,0.00015238272,0.00014444289,0.00006865785,0.000031874162],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016313791,0.00007043246,0.00019682273,0.000027881919,0.00022754875,0.000009683942,0.00022948968,0.00012364826,0.000019835044],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013709612,0.000033383873,0.00003756238,0.00011113905,0.0021725595,0.000032988886,0.000042309308,0.00015112867,8.7434813e-7],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0047756955,0.00036037798,0.23188452,0.000042324536,0.00007838328,0.0000076555325,0.0056134416,0.0000030928893,0.01879252,0.19149297,0.00043292408,0.54651606],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00024729638,0.0010053769,0.98942626,0.000010816684,0.000015588254,0.0000051265592,0.00026340495,0.0000018156557,0.0009737462,0.007826684,0.00018769063,0.00003616932],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00021210397,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00023354818,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7575418,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000004309301,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000014856107,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8004886},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2129730712","doi":"10.7202/1029207ar","title":"Less Evidence, Better Knowledge","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"McGill Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Hearsay; Contextualism; Epistemology; Context (archaeology); Argument (complex analysis); Jury; Admissible evidence; Attribution; Law; Law and economics; Political science; Philosophy; Sociology; Psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.2688049660234274,"score_gpt":0.4251731878246394,"score_spread":0.15636822180121202,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2129730712","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.023279479,0.0016693745,0.00027312836,0.004513634,0.002239405,0.000086203465,0.0000035923717,0.00008972688,0.96784544],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9947805,0.00010473787,0.0013638869,0.00059501926,0.001073119,0.0000024230221,1.4730313e-7,0.000014209376,0.0020659857],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99816614,0.0003187506,0.00026521523,0.00016178635,0.0007233984,0.0003646966],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983857,0.00028770193,0.00013418087,0.00014329658,0.00062892766,0.0004201631],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002521725,0.00009991764,0.00015523011,0.00008075704,0.0028896327,0.00025796174,0.00056125235,0.00009221621,0.00023363292],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010441273,0.00008299726,0.00007523504,0.0003274231,0.00023058838,0.0008209742,0.00008134355,0.00031186317,0.000568599],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000066221386,0.00015525108,0.0019053622,0.000014759484,0.000038811475,0.00016243735,0.005585235,0.000029486695,0.0000171309,0.44751742,0.07840169,0.46610618],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00018259563,0.000035162568,0.00018571343,0.000104042614,0.000011630038,0.000046001373,0.0022256428,0.000003255018,0.00007323601,0.013731608,0.9832767,0.00012436272],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00034821942,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011287553,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.971501,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00018839414,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000100995574,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9984085},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2131748994","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.12832","title":"Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Forensic Sciences","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Ontario Tech University; Lakeridge Health","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Forensic science; Witness; Conviction; Verdict; Forensic psychology; Psychology; Law; Sexual assault; Cross-examination; Criminology; Political science; Human factors and ergonomics; Poison control; Medicine; Medical emergency","score_opus":0.2328730072914567,"score_gpt":0.48382485921251944,"score_spread":0.25095185192106273,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2131748994","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9946014,0.0008662748,0.00043819402,0.0013823468,0.001698929,0.000242133,0.0000028474828,0.000016985314,0.0007508701],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9785025,0.000042663254,0.020623876,0.0001490666,0.00064967765,0.0000025738707,8.2152795e-8,0.000011434068,0.00001810257],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99543893,0.0002584636,0.0008116707,0.00040660883,0.002443646,0.0006406763],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99458086,0.0008172996,0.0010649366,0.00028976818,0.0025541196,0.00069301884],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.008594657,0.00021992475,0.00044469011,0.0007691382,0.0020395746,0.00066618767,0.0014835875,0.00007241104,0.000021923186],"category_scores_gemma":[0.013521891,0.00013651796,0.00013916608,0.0042230454,0.009781398,0.0033338098,0.00020925037,0.00025318514,0.000002319572],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00032430034,0.00028556652,0.06560043,0.00003213966,0.00008875352,0.000031392803,0.16949615,0.030168965,0.010855157,0.008990763,0.0045194062,0.70960695],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0022950282,0.011855745,0.30543125,0.007261094,0.0004470934,0.0030749005,0.3384962,0.014201637,0.027424876,0.2857743,0.001275204,0.0024626788],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003086798,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00089731143,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.70714426,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00032884284,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007706031,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99925965},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2143933647","doi":"10.1177/0093854810373587","title":"Factors Affecting Juror Decisions in Historic Child Sexual Abuse Cases Involving Continuous Memories","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Criminal Justice and Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Psychology; Sexual abuse; Sentence; Social psychology; Suicide prevention; Poison control; Medicine; Law; Medical emergency; Political science","score_opus":0.09227811425558172,"score_gpt":0.37226330949613207,"score_spread":0.2799851952405503,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2143933647","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99678737,0.00051294116,0.000021286047,0.000039957664,0.0018095032,0.000231174,0.000010203204,0.000097315664,0.0004902502],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99845916,0.0001234194,0.00057277264,0.00006481895,0.00036855324,0.000017157312,0.000004067869,0.000021704633,0.00036834172],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982992,0.00009311095,0.00031189944,0.00040946444,0.00044628195,0.0004400371],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99734366,0.0019266004,0.00013538296,0.00020787992,0.00017679186,0.00020969786],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005704938,0.00020841141,0.00027758963,0.00024549162,0.0011793277,0.00023583148,0.00029939396,0.00018600356,0.00008565176],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004951883,0.00018616195,0.000043617176,0.00039785716,0.00035892677,0.00046764195,0.00007559082,0.00053505134,0.000011563471],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001239962,0.001424396,0.16120386,0.0005389167,0.000016105363,0.001476406,0.520711,0.0000044129893,0.00966093,0.0026179585,0.00094862,0.3012734],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00048011748,0.00022637409,0.37870422,0.00016026809,0.0032008474,0.000097552474,0.60998505,0.000003102803,0.00088505313,0.000050297625,0.005561233,0.00064587407],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00090873847,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.017888363,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.30062753,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007441338,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00014664502,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99821264},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2145190242","doi":"10.1558/ijsll.v14i1.150","title":"Examining jurors’ discursive exchanges related to mitigating factors during capital jury deliberations","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Journal of Speech Language and the Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Capital (architecture); Business; Political science; Sociology; Law; Geography","score_opus":0.01931117824339449,"score_gpt":0.33680182456446167,"score_spread":0.31749064632106716,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2145190242","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9882371,0.00044841995,0.00022312565,0.0028571165,0.00065876957,0.000074995885,0.0000059043177,0.000016104103,0.0074784798],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9973181,0.00004621193,0.001059556,0.00026446983,0.0005266629,7.382978e-7,0.0000016207875,0.000009131283,0.00077351014],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99867725,0.00007258373,0.00034549323,0.000099485835,0.0006378962,0.00016726255],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998603,0.00062056934,0.00025195742,0.00006368212,0.00035771137,0.00010310988],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012321278,0.00008215659,0.00013147632,0.00014023167,0.00032617952,0.00020302492,0.00037364117,0.000047942434,0.00009554015],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00081262743,0.00005477437,0.000058534348,0.00014909737,0.00020815978,0.00037151322,0.00007763661,0.00019339629,0.0000061925557],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00028819407,0.00007472789,0.0027259733,0.000010865807,0.00039614327,0.0009592372,0.7150978,0.000060324877,0.006028215,0.19688952,0.00014867587,0.07732032],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004677076,0.00021911817,0.062412858,0.00097285584,0.00019397464,0.0008219967,0.8297352,0.000010469407,0.042710654,0.04679468,0.010717168,0.0007339428],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00023353136,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011542235,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15009484,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006406369,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000040154686,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.25087422},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2149727989","doi":"10.1177/0093854809344173","title":"The Effects of Victim Gender, Defendant Gender, and Defendant Age on Juror Decision Making","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Criminal Justice and Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":93,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Credibility; Social psychology; Human factors and ergonomics; Sentence; Suicide prevention; Injury prevention; Poison control; Law; Medical emergency; Medicine; Political science","score_opus":0.06150790034977005,"score_gpt":0.38102591123916985,"score_spread":0.3195180108893998,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2149727989","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99335045,0.0033970845,0.0005996923,0.000046161163,0.0005615654,0.00032477133,0.0000045640004,0.00004613962,0.0016695927],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961866,0.0015512428,0.001737461,0.00030375033,0.00012620022,0.000014192024,7.782687e-7,0.000013495533,0.0000662573],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99814856,0.00013125563,0.00030930378,0.00037504954,0.0006363241,0.00039950124],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973944,0.0019328163,0.00015872819,0.00023904625,0.00013125942,0.00014374488],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005986163,0.00019519206,0.00023014969,0.00010763943,0.001189568,0.000206423,0.00029241148,0.000120466095,0.0000111654845],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0012065661,0.00013937,0.00006599636,0.00020293238,0.0003504191,0.00015342984,0.00007689023,0.00021030728,0.000007810292],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00022625961,0.00028157057,0.00024082302,0.00046641898,0.000009092917,0.00030579127,0.016532855,0.0000016238727,0.0020740554,0.011110281,0.0003812677,0.96836996],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002267479,0.0026218742,0.8310151,0.0013896344,0.017245116,0.00020444627,0.11568958,0.000036515252,0.003979249,0.0145967305,0.00960731,0.0013469323],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000013921634,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00004435178,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.967023,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003633987,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000882308,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.91493154},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2152358658","doi":"10.1111/j.174-1617.2004.tb00659.x","title":"CANADIAN ISSUE, EH?","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Family Court Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Economic Justice; Citation; Law; Library science; Sociology; Political science; Computer science","score_opus":0.041699897021226,"score_gpt":0.37368938095527743,"score_spread":0.3319894839340514,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2152358658","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0007742483,0.42569518,0.00011598459,0.112450816,0.0010306643,0.0006863918,0.000014007379,0.00016339167,0.4590693],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.10456897,0.7768745,0.0026131428,0.08617307,0.001046558,0.00007344792,0.0000130773615,0.000053718624,0.028583502],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9985942,0.00008999101,0.00023176834,0.00021854875,0.00047259577,0.0003928546],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990618,0.00006637869,0.00006702468,0.00026534844,0.00019244828,0.00034695337],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010054932,0.0001066062,0.00024161606,0.00007277008,0.0003840871,0.00007375608,0.00048329378,0.00007774537,0.0011886103],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0008176275,0.000097501295,0.00007517021,0.00063649856,0.00008198213,0.00015813833,0.00002293203,0.00013389655,0.0043449607],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[8.500119e-7,0.000022289805,0.00015238862,0.00041991394,0.000011595023,0.000052130817,0.00088360795,0.0000068908016,0.0000034976351,0.024040675,0.7472458,0.2271604],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005512214,0.000008416754,0.00090517383,0.0017747275,0.000019227202,0.0000014879823,0.0001548241,8.3219135e-8,0.0000011313089,0.0028170175,0.9941353,0.00012749167],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.17727663,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.31590715,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4304858,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003962043,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0020857202,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99972445},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2155797509","doi":"10.1080/0269993024400002","title":"Why wasn't O.J. convicted? Emotional coherence in legal inference","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cognition & Emotion","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":150,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy); Psychology; Wishful thinking; Verdict; Bayesian probability; Bayesian inference; Inference; Social psychology; Cognitive psychology; Epistemology; Law; Artificial intelligence; Computer science; Statistics; Mathematics; Philosophy; Political science","score_opus":0.050460372454312924,"score_gpt":0.34588127314331024,"score_spread":0.2954209006889973,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2155797509","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.61513823,0.00019096794,0.038092848,0.0035814347,0.0016722769,0.00085598824,0.000035314442,0.0004119909,0.34002092],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9971231,0.00009127371,0.0006980237,0.0010819332,0.00010151139,0.000026458285,0.000037130943,0.000011173949,0.0008293888],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99792564,0.00044375868,0.0003242857,0.00034297098,0.00063457876,0.0003287589],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99876934,0.00033452682,0.00013637674,0.0001302803,0.0005176893,0.0001118034],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00083619007,0.00013427384,0.00015092597,0.00023180219,0.00035005537,0.00018281768,0.00018015238,0.00015799844,0.0033334775],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0030117894,0.00015132397,0.000047119556,0.0009018147,0.0002252156,0.0009960278,0.000019994673,0.00022162964,0.00042307389],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001222486,0.0012834191,0.026629662,0.00013987298,0.000039226015,0.000084559724,0.009560962,0.00039008897,0.0028853961,0.8310686,0.021617658,0.10617834],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0032815272,0.00022715922,0.16500281,0.0010556057,0.000061349296,0.000033743705,0.0076774242,0.00028878817,0.0035750489,0.22825414,0.5892147,0.0013277305],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00015883952,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009904621,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.60281444,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012284143,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00034590473,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975776},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2156286101","doi":"10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01621.x","title":"The CSI Effect and the Canadian and the Australian Jury*<sup>,†</sup>","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Forensic Sciences","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":39,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Mount Royal University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Criminology; Political science; Law; Psychology","score_opus":0.020282698563805664,"score_gpt":0.3289497797943741,"score_spread":0.30866708123056846,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2156286101","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.877785,0.00079784787,0.0000027303035,0.109799735,0.0009859283,0.00023054493,0.0000011711528,0.0000060508396,0.010390933],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99791014,0.00023012626,0.00023314268,0.0005105102,0.00041416008,0.0000024573785,2.1686215e-8,0.0000034409818,0.0006960218],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978093,0.00044011552,0.00029347796,0.00013911184,0.0009418766,0.00037610927],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9949712,0.004131662,0.00029104762,0.0001499752,0.00023259532,0.0002234781],"candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.01634343,0.000102908256,0.00020730394,0.00010023834,0.0048612156,0.001417443,0.0009868518,0.000070420094,0.000024914214],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0050011897,0.000036052836,0.00008314703,0.000528388,0.013467961,0.00035394347,0.00005490488,0.0004665794,0.000003973202],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00035267413,0.000009832938,0.012051677,0.000009693118,0.00007210544,0.00002530604,0.03524975,0.0000792123,0.000018817533,0.46675336,0.03303367,0.45234388],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0037104383,0.00037750028,0.035280492,0.00011144948,0.00017698524,0.0005226529,0.024117367,0.0006077748,0.00014912499,0.25558308,0.6790336,0.0003295793],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.018282508,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.33686322,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6459999,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000025956728,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00086254446,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996192},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2162386904","doi":"10.1111/j.1540-6563.2007.00193.x","title":"The Legacy of <i>Forsey v. Cunningham</i>: Safeguarding the Integrity of the Right to Trial by Jury","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Historian","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Estate; Jury; Brother; Law; Chapel; Politics; History; Art history; Political science","score_opus":0.024067272214344397,"score_gpt":0.3387257373497547,"score_spread":0.3146584651354103,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2162386904","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.46428308,0.003003632,0.002241046,0.022542907,0.043798372,0.002524947,0.000036824447,0.0001450256,0.46142417],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9912342,0.000019773146,0.00015283021,0.00018991297,0.0009065352,0.000008099384,3.3449564e-7,0.000011291656,0.0074770665],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978239,0.00027190032,0.00047445734,0.00019024899,0.0009224233,0.00031710046],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974206,0.0013863344,0.00034970048,0.0005136476,0.0002519457,0.000077770965],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0053278455,0.00010793567,0.00019928403,0.000047765716,0.0013175539,0.00006762012,0.0013222033,0.00010426192,0.000055253524],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0033908298,0.00005298535,0.0001623569,0.0007514454,0.0005753439,0.00014959037,0.000121644814,0.00031263722,0.000013037581],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0041383896,0.00020202804,0.0004449692,0.000023556639,0.000062076244,0.0000032350315,0.07483158,0.000007318849,0.0027334886,0.22460161,0.57557964,0.11737211],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007330763,0.000047153113,0.00024962844,0.000028207376,0.000017141198,4.0280491e-7,0.0030179694,3.0502005e-7,0.001787931,0.002219127,0.99182576,0.00007332357],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0012281253,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003892557,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5269511,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00024632586,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00037999524,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999826},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2215262007","doi":"10.1177/0739986315620374","title":"The Influence of Defendant Immigration Status, Country of Origin, and Ethnicity on Juror Decisions","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Culpability; Immigration; Ethnic group; Psychology; Outgroup; In-group favoritism; Criminology; Social psychology; Ingroups and outgroups; Race (biology); Political science; Law; Sociology; Social identity theory; Social group; Gender studies","score_opus":0.11703254998595948,"score_gpt":0.4206576316466464,"score_spread":0.3036250816606869,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2215262007","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9977702,0.001123808,0.000065293614,0.00035885253,0.0003319457,0.00008895396,0.000009106011,0.0000052989217,0.00024653185],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99779266,0.001270691,0.00082014187,0.00003063641,0.00003628067,9.0924505e-7,1.3537257e-7,0.000003482108,0.00004504235],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9969896,0.00022951675,0.0006291242,0.00014607374,0.0017327688,0.0002729309],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9969349,0.0008338299,0.00093427754,0.00013115133,0.0009566879,0.00020918623],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0043803416,0.000093832285,0.000235978,0.00014806377,0.00051476405,0.00009346509,0.0006427279,0.00006473634,0.000010012801],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0016694335,0.000056126355,0.000057296606,0.00082159514,0.0017218249,0.0005937887,0.000059996964,0.00019003134,0.0000018760072],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0011928346,0.0015205919,0.39673796,0.000032520515,0.00005727001,0.000055626184,0.07514237,0.0050954106,0.017454492,0.13793322,0.008536782,0.35624093],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016334094,0.0066568255,0.78563315,0.0009632928,0.00026499448,0.00007526938,0.08264455,0.00007589426,0.002271647,0.026884932,0.09229858,0.0005974736],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009992209,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0023639419,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.38889515,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008981582,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0015309964,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.63441354},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2231851616","doi":"10.60082/2817-5069.2740","title":"Book Note: In Doubt: The Psychology Of The Criminal Justice Process, by Dan Simon","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Osgoode Hall law journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminology; Criminal justice; Process (computing); Psychology; Economic Justice; Law and economics; Sociology; Law; Political science; Computer science","score_opus":0.028068425244667145,"score_gpt":0.377324005241657,"score_spread":0.34925557999698986,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2231851616","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.030369785,0.0056425803,0.002548525,0.026784375,0.0017893618,0.00040772348,0.000007433993,0.00004784639,0.9324024],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9934364,0.00027362083,0.00018177189,0.0053293947,0.00029836575,0.0000050212625,3.0844956e-7,0.000014876551,0.00046024154],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99759215,0.0006069723,0.00043023392,0.00020752315,0.0007749683,0.00038816765],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99848944,0.00048506132,0.0004051177,0.0002910466,0.00023242018,0.00009691805],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022169775,0.00013030913,0.0001993127,0.000041150637,0.0010677103,0.0001365622,0.0013246031,0.00014364602,0.0001562604],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009339612,0.00007605477,0.00008492508,0.0003236861,0.0006833901,0.0002799509,0.000067579625,0.00066846114,0.000016247084],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003504906,0.00061806943,0.0023283197,0.00018264295,0.00004582556,0.000022231568,0.024103034,0.00087504083,0.0010657731,0.80878603,0.106010534,0.055612005],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013037723,0.00017766192,0.0037872065,0.00028178716,0.00031299004,0.00008988966,0.0075849122,0.00014460807,0.0011247757,0.1583499,0.8264583,0.0003841915],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0017092279,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03723676,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96306664,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000044415356,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00017245332,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9803312},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2241404273","doi":"10.4324/9781315555331-25","title":"Home Truths about Truth Commission Processes: How Victim-Centred Truth and Perpetrator-Focused Adversarial Processes Mutually Challenge Assumptions of Justice and Truth","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Fredericton; University of New Brunswick","funders":"","keywords":"Adversarial system; Commission; Law; Economic Justice; Political science; Psychology; Sociology","score_opus":0.02425597751227967,"score_gpt":0.28783467645070127,"score_spread":0.2635786989384216,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2241404273","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.920507,0.04776333,0.012602207,0.009867574,0.0022612936,0.0010912573,0.00013970389,0.00041397774,0.005353649],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94871676,0.049638055,0.00029795323,0.00001997806,0.0007274166,0.000014760881,0.0000023178684,0.000054503635,0.00052826863],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9949613,0.0004007476,0.0006334521,0.00065968884,0.0011913872,0.002153414],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9950835,0.0023855113,0.0007477571,0.00027873984,0.0010539999,0.00045045206],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020498852,0.00042070966,0.00061241747,0.00038494798,0.0013096653,0.0003834289,0.0007267701,0.00032917087,0.000086907756],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0075663216,0.0003053703,0.0000993137,0.0008727659,0.0006569168,0.0013906151,0.000091745096,0.00095115363,0.0000074549343],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0032560453,0.001740453,0.0040091528,0.0028050998,0.0010504001,0.000047980906,0.06327723,0.000015285292,0.0015197154,0.47123802,0.00041730664,0.4506233],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.029779162,0.006127046,0.0092470115,0.0046777516,0.0032655094,0.00072191656,0.3161577,0.00007983139,0.0016230183,0.5816499,0.042476214,0.0041949395],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00002627349,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00077828683,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.44642836,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005220685,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009166614,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999905},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2253053320","doi":"","title":"The Role of Directed Verdicts in the Criminal Trial","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Verdict; Law; Political science; Injustice; Hung jury; Constitution; Adversarial system","score_opus":0.021511756407632043,"score_gpt":0.3353220784490938,"score_spread":0.31381032204146175,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2253053320","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9469447,0.019976826,0.00010450979,0.0017990071,0.00078315,0.00030889438,6.625526e-7,0.000028277085,0.03005398],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99596506,0.002660542,0.000016852273,0.000041433734,0.00081389665,0.0000065620857,1.6665417e-7,0.0000068371096,0.0004886629],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9965464,0.00068412034,0.00027955562,0.000073815085,0.0007137932,0.0017023121],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99872214,0.0007984253,0.00019553737,0.00013479889,0.00009862653,0.000050484916],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010550496,0.00007516443,0.00011463721,0.00006457521,0.00071665,0.000087753935,0.0007370454,0.000060387316,0.000021674203],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001383697,0.000041125575,0.00008005585,0.00043448698,0.00016992651,0.00023614132,0.000026000715,0.0010298622,0.000013897257],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0020234336,0.0001697581,0.0018035901,0.0000013876985,0.000036245307,7.103274e-7,0.017117761,0.0000024632584,0.000034898952,0.7828534,0.00024668992,0.19570963],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0044694217,0.00033256476,0.0038289817,0.000019860792,0.000060677154,0.00005405608,0.10956034,0.000006623238,0.00007560168,0.698096,0.18334915,0.00014672974],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00018469284,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0035913019,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1955629,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002992899,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0020841649,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.55119646},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2257438046","doi":"","title":"The Rule in Hodge's Case: Rumours of its Death are Greatly Exaggerated","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Proclamation; Rule of law; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.06098885481886704,"score_gpt":0.3756703658909404,"score_spread":0.3146815110720733,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2257438046","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9184105,0.0011403342,0.000033109744,0.0058948863,0.00012430146,0.00017355221,0.000005006266,0.00006682268,0.074151516],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9884554,0.00019071845,0.00046660608,0.00017416007,0.0000824127,0.0000072330995,2.916721e-7,0.000007393776,0.010615795],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9988336,0.00013498875,0.00023900636,0.0001608258,0.00035552337,0.0002760314],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99888164,0.00058082945,0.000113478476,0.00015753084,0.00020326876,0.00006326369],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009013064,0.00007938797,0.000130475,0.00007120796,0.00035785817,0.0000902729,0.00030314267,0.000073958465,0.00038066422],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010540881,0.00005347308,0.00003320216,0.00056542375,0.00010712437,0.00019493853,0.000040963434,0.00009710352,0.0000922206],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000195507,0.0006975652,0.1030595,0.00006963886,0.000074151336,0.001373198,0.050485972,0.0012725579,0.0004067335,0.19118033,0.037905045,0.6132798],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0012613112,0.00009741674,0.12162323,0.0003353014,0.00004061499,0.0001833288,0.05598905,0.0004415589,0.008278417,0.007629551,0.8032502,0.0008700316],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00064742926,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.016616233,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.76534516,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006616492,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00017582276,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9272248},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2266597856","doi":"","title":"Justice is blind when it comes to Canadian jury selection","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury selection; Economic Justice; Jury; Selection (genetic algorithm); Political science; Law; Criminology; Computer science; Psychology; Artificial intelligence","score_opus":0.20916134854532753,"score_gpt":0.4359453966142839,"score_spread":0.22678404806895636,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2266597856","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.028582266,0.0000626914,0.001558084,0.11652288,0.0011946667,0.00031038813,0.000008443243,0.00017024505,0.85159034],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8511391,0.0000104082565,0.006280308,0.024856592,0.00044485577,0.000009688945,0.0000013089265,0.0000130808885,0.117244646],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9988043,0.000062050276,0.00012842081,0.00020149883,0.000471265,0.0003325021],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99854696,0.00011149145,0.000028594412,0.00010954623,0.0004976742,0.0007057074],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00072101486,0.000072505936,0.00009233481,0.00020164433,0.0003889111,0.0001975537,0.0002847319,0.00008944941,0.0019234639],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013620766,0.000069057394,0.00002015446,0.0006234407,0.000044480243,0.00023788474,0.00002671313,0.00007757021,0.0017988773],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000010379819,0.000008308341,0.00047572967,0.0000027958326,0.000004438589,0.0000017897004,0.016703751,0.00001599696,0.0000023247203,0.0075045144,0.9548543,0.020415643],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001097868,0.000028267867,0.00031433723,0.0000061354867,0.000016105767,9.137628e-7,0.008358288,0.000024429177,0.00004731542,0.0046012746,0.9863811,0.00011205154],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.28825638,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.901894,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.82255685,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003385156,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0019743335,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989889},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2271948514","doi":"","title":"Who Are Judges Writing For","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Legal writing; Style (visual arts); Law; Psychology; Writing style; Political science; Social psychology; Linguistics; Literature; Legal research; Art; Philosophy","score_opus":0.02396642172634052,"score_gpt":0.3545095283274627,"score_spread":0.3305431066011222,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2271948514","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7463769,0.032086525,0.083566256,0.07032405,0.0011847129,0.0010816272,0.000010321004,0.00054036826,0.06482924],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9913163,0.002728859,0.00047588572,0.0006257594,0.0010801493,0.0000029745504,4.92266e-7,0.0000120900795,0.0037574875],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9970341,0.000083619925,0.00023724855,0.00016880715,0.00040448838,0.0020717522],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991519,0.00019963023,0.00020810957,0.00009354551,0.00025385653,0.00009294291],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0034473347,0.00009800205,0.00016852198,0.000100853904,0.0010343886,0.0002210056,0.0004191891,0.000083334584,0.000035042758],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010085778,0.000090944435,0.00011014595,0.0002573464,0.000054412736,0.0003173383,0.000011252885,0.0007509282,0.000019110481],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000032211345,0.00003592382,0.0012877523,0.00000266982,0.00002171843,0.000002146781,0.00086368277,0.000012248406,0.000026907352,0.53518504,0.0020548603,0.46047485],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00037876627,0.00020520527,0.0027316837,0.00006158331,0.000018276662,0.000038976712,0.014725165,0.000007651641,0.000033560624,0.92913127,0.052495953,0.00017193265],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000011299654,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0012237364,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.46030292,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005974858,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0020247998,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7955785},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2277017378","doi":"","title":"Admissibility Compared: The Reception of Incriminating Expert Evidence (I.E., Forensic Science) in Four Adversarial Jurisdictions","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Digital Commons - DU (University of Denver)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Adversarial system; Federal Rules of Evidence; Digital evidence; Forensic science; Law; Political science; Psychology; Computer security; Computer science; Digital forensics; Medicine","score_opus":0.06183119103312358,"score_gpt":0.3077140182746072,"score_spread":0.24588282724148364,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2277017378","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.977361,0.000031600644,0.002023065,0.0012550078,0.0002097925,0.00018585105,0.000010936857,0.00003960238,0.018883092],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991596,0.000024795683,0.00066526554,0.000019610108,0.000037944603,3.2192312e-7,0.0000017269133,0.000004139226,0.000086634456],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9983303,0.00020931002,0.00021967413,0.00027001736,0.0007353517,0.00023536873],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99771863,0.0011672735,0.00025424256,0.00034713172,0.0004069738,0.00010576723],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016322787,0.000093541275,0.00021649095,0.00024406484,0.00087871996,0.000086552,0.0010365807,0.00006581062,0.00007403964],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00325679,0.00009428846,0.000095232164,0.0011922886,0.002139341,0.0018101654,0.00034629842,0.0001480646,0.000011175681],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006536034,0.00077804795,0.36273277,0.00012114749,0.000047281635,0.000014976108,0.23523118,0.00064275734,0.0008427685,0.032728463,0.004039251,0.36216775],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0017341153,0.00043399812,0.8109978,0.0009195526,0.00008549654,0.000008610071,0.1271106,0.0071421145,0.00045816976,0.020159224,0.030260328,0.00069002935],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0027949512,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008667281,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.44826502,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00018971796,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003349591,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7882491},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2289146279","doi":"","title":"Challenging a Potential Juror for Cause: Resuscitation or Requiem?","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of New South Wales law journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Aside; Project commissioning; Law; Publishing; Political science; Criminology; Psychology","score_opus":0.06640430337038426,"score_gpt":0.31678248969345996,"score_spread":0.2503781863230757,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2289146279","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.85158294,0.0006135479,0.06095945,0.011505875,0.0011979355,0.00074499205,0.000092158894,0.00023359914,0.0730695],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97411656,0.00024872282,0.00915459,0.000058987687,0.00036842763,4.8682555e-8,0.0000017213919,0.00000929431,0.016041636],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989571,0.00008385638,0.00015690763,0.00014904735,0.00040374463,0.00024933176],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992143,0.00012280238,0.00017665402,0.00008994384,0.0002170521,0.00017927458],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004598148,0.00007783311,0.00014437546,0.000100322126,0.001553676,0.00007240049,0.00036092586,0.000088000925,0.0012562213],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00012596705,0.000079283986,0.000110707355,0.0001819008,0.00020593681,0.00042112658,0.000021031723,0.00013414858,0.000030098909],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0056843106,0.00025633667,0.00022157402,0.00014007455,0.00041287296,0.00063144317,0.3623652,0.004076318,0.00023644824,0.10852943,0.028531373,0.4889146],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.003453703,0.0003082098,0.0011993409,0.00027671765,0.00022296264,0.000055350225,0.11358354,0.00015466701,0.000030087307,0.017412491,0.8629116,0.00039134105],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00030465567,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0024373922,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8343802,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000761966,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00032553697,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99974614},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2306485372","doi":"","title":"Retrospection of the Rationality and the Feasibility of the Criminal Reconciliation System","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"海外英语","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Confession (law); Rationality; Punishment (psychology); Criminal law; Law; Political science; Criminal procedure; Agency (philosophy); Language change; Theory of criminal justice; Compensation (psychology); Negotiation; Criminology; Sociology; Criminal justice; Psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.06103612620021317,"score_gpt":0.3453855681623965,"score_spread":0.28434944196218337,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2306485372","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.984197,0.000045803794,0.0004358243,0.002393349,0.0004503089,0.0002730369,0.0000037179218,0.000011767191,0.012189189],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9995419,0.000003592071,0.000042205207,0.000049055245,0.00007499044,0.0000037810398,1.2691577e-7,0.0000015791558,0.00028277343],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99856466,0.0006650051,0.00019702637,0.000098529206,0.00041901902,0.000055768578],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987735,0.000461631,0.0002579567,0.000249249,0.00024690802,0.000010740184],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00331908,0.000034857458,0.00008933283,0.000007693063,0.00037026044,0.000022357932,0.00022298406,0.000038154616,0.000014239757],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003041274,0.000015925225,0.000050655217,0.00019943477,0.00050455047,0.000067768575,0.000042529748,0.00006183233,0.000001045344],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00010165743,0.00002845437,0.1705372,0.00013216592,0.000009615543,1.1206197e-8,0.0121737,0.000035918933,0.00027056888,0.810622,0.0004845232,0.005604201],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00031808577,0.000014211065,0.96294403,0.000053916534,0.000033188146,6.8742696e-7,0.0038710479,0.00026367395,0.0008587704,0.030323774,0.0012814414,0.00003716183],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004971709,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011809368,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.79240686,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006739494,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000094121606,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.36409086},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2311505789","doi":"10.1080/2049677x.2015.1110973","title":"Lay participation in modern law: a comparative historical analysis","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Comparative Legal History","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Political science; Sociology; Law","score_opus":0.3277723541327663,"score_gpt":0.44959030172594494,"score_spread":0.12181794759317865,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2311505789","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.33123744,0.007675438,0.00870498,0.00078199775,0.0014153565,0.00049618,0.000009211825,0.00024272954,0.64943665],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9873365,0.00000446597,0.0005800238,0.000254006,0.00012774926,0.00006384834,0.000010714068,0.000007822866,0.011614873],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99714243,0.0007981196,0.00046035985,0.0004330556,0.0007939938,0.00037203456],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984491,0.00032631776,0.00022685752,0.00025782146,0.00044453098,0.00029538228],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009564372,0.00018411825,0.00064512785,0.0004114496,0.00020162475,0.000047590896,0.00036784675,0.00011102601,0.00014501018],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00018987144,0.00019261021,0.00013222918,0.0010973944,0.00047066464,0.00067386637,0.00005051103,0.00028450153,0.00016668734],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00039806977,0.0009488049,0.0045728176,0.000010068826,0.00023105374,0.000049241582,0.5147372,0.0121527305,0.00009344527,0.24329922,0.22260149,0.0009058922],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00043538812,0.00007338041,0.002546153,0.000010158212,0.00010616981,2.806949e-7,0.0034775068,0.0022218048,0.00004247859,0.0028368558,0.9879648,0.0002850049],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005334082,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06116019,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.76536334,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006900963,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00075102306,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99691135},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2317631794","doi":"10.60082/2817-5069.1030","title":"Book Review: Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong, by Brandon L. Garrett","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Osgoode Hall law journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Criminology; Law; Psychology; Political science; Psychoanalysis; Philosophy","score_opus":0.02452104542485885,"score_gpt":0.3364362381284282,"score_spread":0.3119151927035694,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2317631794","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00025247972,0.66405517,0.0006801566,0.02031413,0.0011663259,0.0004454824,0.000012838764,0.000085573934,0.3129878],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8329984,0.11770085,0.00059870427,0.030503634,0.0028329822,0.00004855336,0.0000073007004,0.00006630844,0.015243294],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9968269,0.0006182298,0.0005517521,0.00020334084,0.0010095107,0.00079025317],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982111,0.00035527215,0.00046515316,0.00025562278,0.00036243227,0.00035043314],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003191749,0.00020086378,0.00027944287,0.00003733543,0.0034406604,0.00041049608,0.00072468125,0.000121903635,0.003054727],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00065656565,0.00014059467,0.00016181626,0.00029071016,0.00040885078,0.0011703327,0.00008878694,0.0007898989,0.00028408307],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002048398,0.00010676822,0.0006045531,0.00011731838,0.000033720742,0.000006499264,0.0036133346,0.0000016453095,0.00003948696,0.08558641,0.90166026,0.008209536],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000300675,0.000026115391,0.000105296225,0.00081118895,0.000114083574,0.00015262015,0.001343863,0.0000022428069,0.00007405997,0.0016925874,0.9951825,0.00019476734],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001095502,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0036925229,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8327459,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00015176822,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00018286027,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99785674},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2342088264","doi":"10.7202/1035886ar","title":"L’évaluation du témoignage d’opinion pour en établir l’admissibilité : les leçons récentes du droit de la preuve","year":2016,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Revue générale de droit","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Philosophy","score_opus":0.038934795953386496,"score_gpt":0.3088293952441592,"score_spread":0.2698945992907727,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2342088264","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.86051613,0.005191229,0.02415513,0.032691997,0.0014011342,0.0008965317,0.00014606363,0.00040768067,0.07459407],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94907117,0.006692546,0.004198702,0.00024886255,0.0028460945,0.00007579565,0.000011694368,0.00009228964,0.036762856],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99469143,0.0017038814,0.0007946172,0.0009096535,0.0007672239,0.0011332071],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9931227,0.0049361996,0.00049590104,0.00056687667,0.0003857085,0.0004926338],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0057298928,0.00035073952,0.0005443283,0.00024890006,0.00066638744,0.00031498988,0.0010465665,0.0007681381,0.0017291954],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0100385165,0.00042266413,0.00033618527,0.0008737958,0.0007188375,0.00089760945,0.00023409877,0.00042975688,0.0007790887],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00010621177,0.0007454497,0.06741206,0.00054706907,0.000120313685,0.00010945634,0.016914,0.0002929087,0.005524183,0.24264896,0.011703378,0.653876],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0015177476,0.00022510193,0.10419062,0.0033234346,0.0001932797,0.00024114233,0.0027418744,0.0018818227,0.001843012,0.689599,0.19320983,0.0010331784],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007605841,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00036085473,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6528428,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002090098,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013843054,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999989},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2343735383","doi":"","title":"Indigenous-specific court initiatives to support Indigenous defendants, victims and witnesses","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Indigenous; Political science; Law; Process (computing); High Court; Federal court; Public relations; Public administration; Criminology; Sociology; Supreme court","score_opus":0.039981310745156484,"score_gpt":0.33857770089685646,"score_spread":0.2985963901517,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2343735383","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9721674,0.009299716,0.006581992,0.0011682186,0.00066633866,0.00045876735,0.000010325632,0.00013465364,0.009512587],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9849819,0.012422417,0.000432611,0.00027966243,0.00060258736,0.000011293295,0.0000028712948,0.000040526702,0.0012261616],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99508095,0.00027425602,0.00041534397,0.0003654539,0.0010418373,0.0028221852],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99827725,0.0001865884,0.00025321852,0.00018690566,0.0005310629,0.00056497863],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0048049544,0.00023604748,0.000321629,0.00035770377,0.0012525017,0.00041161952,0.00064431597,0.00014819182,0.00007107716],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00054221053,0.0002178059,0.00006208021,0.00074848224,0.00024276564,0.00079515285,0.000097563054,0.001189478,0.00019107877],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00047149757,0.0004414269,0.040609185,0.00002043452,0.00033299578,0.00015195516,0.42434293,0.00007868367,0.00010219029,0.12503116,0.0039724554,0.40444508],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013383521,0.0021382705,0.0073821773,0.000064346124,0.000059315462,0.0009629888,0.1639528,7.9650795e-7,0.00015010773,0.3644905,0.4586065,0.0008538367],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00019719763,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005911353,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.45463407,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012592525,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.012322547,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99327666},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2346441189","doi":"","title":"Les Logiques De La Rationalité Judiciaire Et Le Processus De La Preuve Dans Le Contentieux Des Droits Des Peuples Autochtones : Le Cas Des Récits Oraux (The Logics of Judicial Reasoning in the Assessment of Oral Evidence in Aboriginal Cases)","year":2011,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Philosophy; Political science","score_opus":0.1028227266696125,"score_gpt":0.4275920280281915,"score_spread":0.324769301358579,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2346441189","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9498516,0.024680806,0.019163579,0.0010317664,0.00006430751,0.00032716768,0.0000070381175,0.00002117364,0.004852603],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97564894,0.01959671,0.0043416936,0.00004277112,0.00008615128,0.00003849608,0.0000011329845,0.000026975296,0.00021711488],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99157983,0.0049193148,0.0008352334,0.0003234452,0.0007924246,0.0015497464],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9953326,0.0028986486,0.00080127956,0.00018647996,0.00069822726,0.000082738545],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.020141909,0.00028800982,0.0004760684,0.0002239149,0.0012019082,0.00025666493,0.0011139706,0.00028798098,0.000013253595],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0036141402,0.00022615009,0.0001555203,0.001229616,0.004689353,0.0011185348,0.00008002156,0.0018865549,5.1698095e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013493044,0.0005641592,0.1907509,0.00010042398,0.00007849822,0.00007134316,0.05570276,0.00088377023,0.00022100954,0.72941506,0.0000082127035,0.022068918],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00051120785,0.00046005356,0.29197532,0.001232655,0.00009267564,0.00088414486,0.079517365,0.0002614552,0.000552184,0.6241137,0.00019645474,0.00020279674],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.18097012,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.47106346,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.29009333,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001983166,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.027603842,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99801934},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2350399018","doi":"","title":"Inspection Points and Standards of Opinions Rules in Canada","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Hebei faxue","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Relevance (law); Expert witness; Law; Virtue; Process (computing); Witness; Reliability (semiconductor); Political science; Professional standards; Business; Engineering ethics; Computer science; Engineering","score_opus":0.04514751572096763,"score_gpt":0.3586957736268214,"score_spread":0.3135482579058538,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2350399018","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.96711206,0.00040146965,0.00014936992,0.0015343982,0.00043128812,0.0000997834,0.000074040334,0.00002639455,0.030171204],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9992991,0.00005114702,0.00045633852,0.0000596573,0.00003663916,0.000002306376,0.0000013555178,0.000003561153,0.00008989736],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989616,0.00006824968,0.00013503879,0.000099795136,0.0006169376,0.00011835072],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994517,0.00009050534,0.000048025715,0.000071060706,0.0002540295,0.00008467913],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00073174655,0.000041228643,0.00009749845,0.000061329934,0.00007416691,0.000019242094,0.000085617794,0.00002974142,0.000021293583],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013314553,0.000040292172,0.000007358884,0.00022354678,0.000081518636,0.00011944333,0.000027371947,0.000054541568,0.0000022052945],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00020214668,0.0001658815,0.4503212,0.00012073055,0.00003353392,0.00005212603,0.049313508,0.00020091422,0.000041017556,0.18227266,0.19325276,0.12402354],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008209125,0.000058948444,0.13399363,0.00013292006,0.0000063597795,0.0000033241263,0.02667032,0.00006862172,0.00021286446,0.037034277,0.8007708,0.00022703633],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.88457453,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99087745,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.607518,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005598664,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004369884,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7751986},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2396395122","doi":"","title":"Tempest in a Teapot – The Role of the Decision Tree in Enhancing Juror Comprehension and Whether It Interferes with the Jury's Right to Deliberate Freely?","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Verdict; Comprehension; Jury trial; Psychology; Distrust; Political science; Law; Computer science","score_opus":0.0075558409330812384,"score_gpt":0.26954105374933535,"score_spread":0.2619852128162541,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2396395122","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9791102,0.0015527391,0.0012415189,0.016561339,0.0000824928,0.00027956726,9.658107e-7,0.000007986593,0.0011632268],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99812734,0.00075815583,0.00007372456,0.00029258992,0.000073077186,0.00000877839,3.184322e-8,0.000015509828,0.00065076206],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9974268,0.0005092967,0.000351501,0.00021850612,0.00055495475,0.00093895127],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983254,0.001031442,0.00020243997,0.00025145448,0.00013700339,0.000052279058],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003535319,0.00014212099,0.00019082155,0.000131999,0.00046465895,0.00010189638,0.0008094458,0.00006760546,0.000033611836],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00041699864,0.00005038513,0.000048404854,0.0005875151,0.0002555424,0.00022153488,0.00013854043,0.0007856073,0.000007637499],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008099776,0.00011481561,0.00916303,0.0000041073404,0.00005225829,0.0000044052686,0.017483713,0.00009884672,0.019201789,0.033941366,0.0004968941,0.9186288],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0033574775,0.0011245456,0.07183098,0.0026626757,0.00007834883,0.0002297259,0.06596963,0.00006370292,0.011948388,0.7465428,0.09549192,0.0006997791],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003219234,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.3058025,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.917929,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00032936063,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011187674,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.70686483},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2406638244","doi":"","title":"The Challenge for Cause Procedure in Canadian Criminal Law","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Presumption; Jury; Prejudice (legal term); Law; Humanities; Political science; Jury selection; Criminology; Psychology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.031218943924568657,"score_gpt":0.3399721244418263,"score_spread":0.30875318051725764,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2406638244","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.31641874,0.035361614,0.0029720985,0.54863906,0.0028534126,0.002571125,0.00003389773,0.00019290506,0.09095715],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9889605,0.006299029,0.000022298955,0.00020087951,0.00043674544,0.000023783847,1.5806157e-7,0.000015628782,0.0040409947],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.996127,0.00010514252,0.00021701872,0.00017150806,0.00032274504,0.0030565995],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99900573,0.0003892604,0.000095996125,0.0001207738,0.0001794804,0.00020874973],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0044873836,0.000096507734,0.00010344647,0.00009678961,0.0013761867,0.00013232969,0.0005651061,0.00009289965,0.000026876956],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011238907,0.000054617038,0.000059561695,0.00017345979,0.00018369516,0.00025443194,0.000013662991,0.0005531002,0.000024554642],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000028391387,0.000010539008,0.0002069254,0.0000023467596,0.000014231009,0.0000028796974,0.0011575825,4.802325e-7,0.000005268235,0.9435807,0.0002894082,0.054701284],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00033201088,0.00010978287,0.0002150618,0.000036726702,0.00001170325,0.00003135969,0.0052861623,0.0000013055255,0.000009120809,0.63900024,0.35486054,0.00010597625],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.043306693,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9941591,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9508524,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0022033153,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.014702566,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999239},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2418860106","doi":"","title":"Lay Adjudication in Europe: The Rise and Fall of the Traditional Jury","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Adjudication; Jury; Law; Political science; Geography; History","score_opus":0.024012226753786923,"score_gpt":0.23123769617612502,"score_spread":0.2072254694223381,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2418860106","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9738471,0.00026122064,0.0002936304,0.005378338,0.00022172075,0.00022918679,0.000011740767,0.00003725995,0.01971984],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9959679,0.00010676773,0.00051308936,0.000033287044,0.00008774458,5.502669e-7,3.296727e-7,0.0000090727945,0.0032812045],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9981208,0.0004922716,0.0002585417,0.00028406174,0.00062750047,0.00021681632],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977691,0.00096946117,0.0005186256,0.00032057788,0.0003584513,0.0000637738],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011971298,0.00010823119,0.00018799487,0.00010570814,0.0007605438,0.000026151789,0.00072150765,0.000103484395,0.000030914132],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00084565295,0.00007413142,0.000081319464,0.0007144639,0.0011073991,0.00029245674,0.00017902088,0.00015466068,0.0000058349506],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00036651778,0.00072793354,0.41268152,0.0002294233,0.00015802032,0.00006659964,0.076120645,0.00006394509,0.046444707,0.098773904,0.010504468,0.35386232],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0011271924,0.00008457922,0.88126487,0.0006514482,0.00008177971,0.000017778244,0.0073903613,0.000079824,0.0020382227,0.0026615986,0.10429476,0.0003075855],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00078291824,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00052711746,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.46858335,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000079128615,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00031441607,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5849565},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2419047978","doi":"","title":"Erring on the Side of Ignorance: Challenges for Cause Twenty Years after Parks","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Racism; Ignorance; Prejudice (legal term); Criminology; Harm; Criminal justice; Appeal; Context (archaeology); Political science; Economic Justice; Sociology; Law; History","score_opus":0.07037013491092273,"score_gpt":0.35050582377368655,"score_spread":0.28013568886276385,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2419047978","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9606672,0.018096263,0.0017990228,0.009618838,0.00074255106,0.00042664897,0.0000052222244,0.00004410404,0.008600148],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99374485,0.004940936,0.000066106484,0.00011644556,0.0003915975,0.000018329556,1.5960501e-7,0.00001489367,0.00070670666],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978235,0.00016385043,0.00021022598,0.00014273444,0.00055840774,0.0011012792],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990181,0.00034994548,0.00017966682,0.00015222043,0.0002142315,0.0000858351],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0046192147,0.000088983776,0.00014158677,0.00006705559,0.00019295429,0.000055105684,0.00041105825,0.00006957719,0.000015803918],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009383011,0.00006354458,0.00008806241,0.00014166888,0.00011429631,0.00014940354,0.00002669467,0.00061516964,0.000014421969],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006239284,0.00014930415,0.0014094601,0.000018002807,0.00021625773,0.000009525844,0.019663744,0.00023463048,0.000026460018,0.70598394,0.0012599234,0.27040482],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00073593785,0.00047310357,0.002507588,0.00010640452,0.000047790763,0.000020382691,0.037195873,0.000013908164,0.000117979296,0.8858742,0.07269837,0.00020845975],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00004806791,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0053267907,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.27019635,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00038133698,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0020627652,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.36592567},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2442723594","doi":"10.29173/alr1270","title":"Judicial Assessment of the Credibility of Child Witnesses","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Alberta Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":38,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development","keywords":"Credibility; Honesty; Psychology; Context (archaeology); Economic Justice; Jurisprudence; Perception; Law; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Political science","score_opus":0.02985742953325707,"score_gpt":0.3916696831742126,"score_spread":0.3618122536409555,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2442723594","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.022047801,0.053987183,0.00004816099,0.049030658,0.00051424594,0.0013112084,0.000010969188,0.00002770854,0.8730221],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9849242,0.011790789,0.00030815942,0.0024751495,0.0001324771,0.000013048951,8.370827e-7,0.000007280456,0.0003480855],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9981751,0.00031206734,0.00052665034,0.00019627748,0.0006219281,0.00016799482],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982009,0.000644545,0.00038477257,0.0004932191,0.00022920068,0.000047351554],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012752217,0.00009608619,0.00039397035,0.000013074007,0.00023201031,0.000012396464,0.0006483066,0.000051490828,0.00071704393],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0015845149,0.00006249343,0.00016526402,0.0005140826,0.00056338456,0.00016337799,0.000105685765,0.00010992828,0.000013888014],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000036365855,0.00021674596,0.004328268,0.0013624469,0.000030242427,1.4497286e-7,0.00044766124,0.000009730992,0.000008654345,0.9448417,0.0052607507,0.04349002],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007783971,0.000015596026,0.008030115,0.0027009624,0.000082406754,8.485106e-7,0.000024387558,0.0000025925358,0.00014224274,0.0018199144,0.9870173,0.00008584439],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0039025221,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02725582,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9817565,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003727465,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00028035592,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99049425},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2443106421","doi":"10.60082/2817-5069.1498","title":"Challenges for Cause, Stand-Asides, and Peremptory Challenges in the Nineteenth Century","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Osgoode Hall law journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Political science; Certainty; Law; Formalism (music); Jury selection; Predictability; Sociology; Epistemology; Philosophy; Literature","score_opus":0.15075279433856711,"score_gpt":0.3632345721061663,"score_spread":0.21248177776759916,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2443106421","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.014089404,0.20248197,0.00001722225,0.01895115,0.0003624605,0.00042450547,0.0000100524285,0.000052218576,0.763611],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7728606,0.22565466,0.00041364177,0.00021645678,0.00050964433,0.000016711867,5.678435e-7,0.000017796887,0.00030993132],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977666,0.00042577597,0.00032978164,0.00030883285,0.0006549628,0.0005140594],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99864835,0.00073107786,0.00012800057,0.00020763195,0.00012559413,0.00015937866],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0027026066,0.00017649647,0.00023746802,0.00007863557,0.0010482165,0.00027736338,0.00053704024,0.00014649983,0.00026512597],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00019898,0.00012746388,0.00007899576,0.00010713629,0.0002621502,0.00039798135,0.000026358712,0.0003900124,0.000013348912],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009781643,0.00013037179,0.00015821119,0.00005332379,0.000028734157,0.00005223367,0.027092244,0.000017743363,0.0000035899318,0.53658694,0.001229308,0.43454948],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00089269446,0.00018020728,0.006469429,0.00020393694,0.00003499124,0.00015995209,0.03082317,0.000006609377,0.000006644596,0.113560386,0.84738415,0.00027783282],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006413106,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1261596,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.84615487,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000078878424,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00014186633,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8897857},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2464094058","doi":"10.1177/0146167216651853","title":"Stacking the Jury","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"The King's University; Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Psychology; Social psychology; Stacking; Law; Political science; Chemistry","score_opus":0.08068521715389461,"score_gpt":0.4090171480341999,"score_spread":0.3283319308803053,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2464094058","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3499205,0.00040246235,0.00055573025,0.5852949,0.00047067797,0.00013457268,0.000014161989,0.00009578681,0.06311118],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98553365,0.0002216781,0.000094340015,0.0092889825,0.00062719313,0.000010648298,4.1739128e-7,0.000007753295,0.0042153033],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99847287,0.00052340084,0.00014661922,0.00027057575,0.0002811322,0.00030542517],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99906975,0.00061372964,0.000076720535,0.00010753347,0.000082302075,0.00004998911],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0018241139,0.00008547684,0.00013376179,0.000024287516,0.0014827392,0.000061092986,0.00027831152,0.00015764337,0.0022452548],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003947494,0.000051044215,0.000059917835,0.00010545189,0.0014224321,0.000044087923,0.00004676304,0.00013693716,0.00024491898],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00014013701,0.000097872864,0.007915924,0.000013097375,0.000053007516,0.000007463705,0.054399308,1.9933461e-8,0.00013849877,0.27822295,0.21813168,0.44088003],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021753223,0.0000115902585,0.06883319,0.0000071778636,0.0000078811745,0.0000017847499,0.0025497358,1.9072635e-8,0.0000017473631,0.015371146,0.91291076,0.00008743169],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000109416134,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00019079256,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6947791,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000026483349,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000051521743,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998172},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2465969647","doi":"","title":"Sit… Stay… Now Beg for Me: A Look at the Courthouse Dogs Program and the Legal Standard Pennsylvania Should Use to Determine Whether a Dog Can Accompany a Child on the Witness Stand","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Villanova law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Supreme court; Legislature; Political science; Trial court; Confrontation Clause; Constitution; Economic Justice; Witness; Context (archaeology); Balancing test; Legislative intent; Free Exercise Clause; Habeas corpus; History","score_opus":0.10746545805156515,"score_gpt":0.39097609008518747,"score_spread":0.2835106320336223,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2465969647","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.28854224,0.1547708,0.000693755,0.4665987,0.0014769715,0.047610324,0.0014403033,0.0008730338,0.03799389],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9393874,0.01913828,0.0014496364,0.033107717,0.0006344683,0.0021731188,0.000014605625,0.00018275986,0.0039120065],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9963783,0.0007451897,0.0005129529,0.00052998564,0.0012442714,0.00058932265],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99630225,0.0016703788,0.00030395424,0.0008740214,0.00059324026,0.00025616735],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0053911814,0.00035536036,0.0007045439,0.000035918732,0.0013145286,0.00085216964,0.000958693,0.00009690094,0.00010944993],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0016553168,0.00015256992,0.00017449398,0.00065006607,0.0011095513,0.00019284502,0.00029048912,0.0002768436,0.00003385669],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0036909098,0.00042290965,0.0014703536,0.0020734062,0.0005182333,0.0000710077,0.018942073,0.000040280254,0.000019611383,0.534629,0.19409956,0.24402265],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009632297,0.00024212484,0.000054823686,0.0012940662,0.00015046693,0.000029129656,0.00036297247,0.000009282731,0.000015472648,0.001337847,0.9952792,0.00026139003],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009539794,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.044919033,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.80117965,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00018004015,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00037845844,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99998564},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2473093639","doi":"10.5623/cig2015-111","title":"Geomatics and the Law / In Praise of Small Data: Survey Field Notes in Litigation","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"GEOMATICA","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Praise; Geomatics; Field (mathematics); Law; Field survey; Political science; Sociology; Geography; Remote sensing; Art; Cartography; Literature; Mathematics","score_opus":0.2224310860558657,"score_gpt":0.3879251083390743,"score_spread":0.16549402228320859,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2473093639","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9845204,0.00025988865,0.0012862948,0.005373502,0.00010888417,0.0003533094,0.000017301367,0.000018366238,0.008062064],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9969028,0.00002799286,0.0028146566,0.00018455528,0.000021325874,0.000006004321,0.00000787398,0.0000035977666,0.00003117761],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986948,0.00046437222,0.00030585195,0.00012555784,0.00026999222,0.00013943747],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99481034,0.0046425574,0.00010749092,0.00029914905,0.00009812552,0.000042327218],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005393866,0.00005316483,0.00016597631,0.000048252565,0.000051451167,0.0000625962,0.0003707113,0.00006165772,0.000012091121],"category_scores_gemma":[0.017506432,0.00003877478,0.000007914594,0.00032306666,0.0002966719,0.00019941918,0.00014666654,0.00007741404,0.0000069448856],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00040057994,0.0003928551,0.28264818,0.00038576405,0.000032081654,0.00001556173,0.19418031,0.0003469497,0.000011342944,0.44959432,0.0029063034,0.06908578],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004850095,0.00013788967,0.3050368,0.00068784144,0.000038329024,0.0000034349177,0.015805196,0.013038335,0.00024053078,0.652106,0.0075575234,0.00049801246],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.013445823,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.14300567,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.2025117,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000134818865,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00014275154,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9931237},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2492799372","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/pq6a3","title":"R. v. Awer and the Dangers of Science in Sheep’s Clothing","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Gatekeeping; Scrutiny; Jury; Appeal; Scientific evidence; Law; Political science; Psychology; Sociology of scientific knowledge; Sociology; Epistemology; Social science","score_opus":0.042698540631253515,"score_gpt":0.4032295397780889,"score_spread":0.3605309991468354,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2492799372","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.60425,0.000093256436,0.000083322586,0.004892348,0.00022345666,0.000096582444,1.9344385e-7,0.000011161025,0.3903497],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9976581,0.00005562759,0.00061229453,0.0001310252,0.000020645266,0.0000015532345,6.450518e-9,0.0000015301702,0.0015192382],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99926186,0.00003694856,0.00009359093,0.000117157826,0.00035744454,0.00013301699],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993319,0.000256925,0.000083758954,0.00022502398,0.00007305122,0.000029325884],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0032932388,0.000029380428,0.000074024414,0.000054543114,0.0010200726,0.00024430474,0.000725327,0.00002067494,0.00005249814],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0038725373,0.000017579749,0.000011259944,0.00015201955,0.005414677,0.00045666858,0.00015081803,0.00005143398,0.0000035534856],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003746544,0.000020298998,0.034110628,0.000009821029,0.0000024419937,0.000002375492,0.06184713,0.0000074351747,0.00030135264,0.76488453,0.00067389547,0.1381026],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0024039857,0.00003265167,0.70211965,0.0001789169,0.000014915062,0.0000018347763,0.0503669,0.00047850626,0.0017765389,0.16288294,0.079380564,0.000362623],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002727891,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0027710912,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.668009,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000014989393,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00015915684,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99729204},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2494308263","doi":"10.1017/cbo9781107110311.001","title":"Introduction to Basic Concepts and Methods","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Computer science","score_opus":0.0350008488121788,"score_gpt":0.3230640707654928,"score_spread":0.288063221953314,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2494308263","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000072205745,0.00011992725,0.013400627,0.00043793794,0.0006881789,0.00037550804,0.000027271994,0.00015462804,0.9847237],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.00040725147,0.000100545876,0.0038303714,0.00018970101,0.0012178301,6.345947e-7,0.000005443722,0.000029758932,0.99421847],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99835515,0.0002280995,0.00015638197,0.0006353498,0.00035939604,0.0002656467],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985463,0.00030600856,0.00017603638,0.00038979965,0.0003026148,0.000279211],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00074805564,0.00024049547,0.00036566096,0.00022571805,0.00050060294,0.00010685766,0.00045561983,0.00034538595,0.000030881856],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00025915008,0.00029245747,0.00008624138,0.000019905126,0.000523794,0.000088149325,0.00031525458,0.00030321337,0.000040273833],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003294863,0.0000015460968,4.0074525e-7,0.000023024337,0.000024968504,0.000010707135,0.00042001487,0.000001095543,0.000021099066,0.8292895,0.10030478,0.06986993],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014907625,0.0000369367,0.000010221946,0.000060781116,0.00009433988,0.000002828633,0.00017993264,0.0000025541333,0.00010300664,0.000104486666,0.99894345,0.00031237575],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001750329,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000021764914,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.89863867,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001874077,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00015869527,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99995273},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2522412034","doi":"","title":"Face-coverings, demeanour evidence and the right to a fair trial : lessons from the USA and Canada","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Credibility; Law; Face (sociological concept); Political science; Value (mathematics); Identity (music); Empirical evidence; Sociology; Philosophy; Epistemology; Computer science; Social science","score_opus":0.10479166315283875,"score_gpt":0.35775310585954884,"score_spread":0.25296144270671006,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2522412034","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.94937056,0.002307432,0.00070586876,0.037460767,0.0003566958,0.00031374503,0.000053158776,0.0000035424778,0.009428241],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99806327,0.00014970805,0.00014160082,0.000547965,0.0002705938,0.0000069260964,1.8993973e-7,0.0000030681454,0.00081668585],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9988502,0.00020423227,0.0002526583,0.00011768689,0.00046491867,0.000110279136],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99736977,0.0018918362,0.0002343693,0.00006220608,0.00034124122,0.00010059742],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005637758,0.000086187974,0.0001843784,0.000021472277,0.0005048678,0.0003621442,0.0004108325,0.00002375581,0.00022057249],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00048676893,0.00004368722,0.00003082695,0.00006501088,0.00038545285,0.00028088602,0.00010053029,0.00015071551,0.000013233289],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.013031315,0.00018676934,0.015103668,0.0000112490725,0.0011135185,0.00002745617,0.39586198,0.00022818893,0.0003050651,0.47917885,0.078704,0.016247936],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.009036139,0.00023141425,0.016100805,0.00036794363,0.000095696436,0.000020687188,0.07470246,0.00024197232,0.00008648149,0.07156642,0.8272139,0.00033611554],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.21551147,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5748465,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7485099,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004351316,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00016645815,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7897125},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2528044283","doi":"10.3138/9781442685345-013","title":"8. ‘The Day Has Gone By for the Worship of Legal Idols’: The Decline of the Jury in Ontario","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"University of Toronto Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Worship; Law; History; Political science; Art","score_opus":0.055897752128800375,"score_gpt":0.2641869090384519,"score_spread":0.2082891569096515,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2528044283","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00028372929,0.0044480055,0.00016925721,0.0016969522,0.00042317546,0.0013175376,0.000101291625,0.00001738932,0.99154264],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.030870797,0.0003481012,0.00012206599,0.00008909253,0.00006834499,0.0000010794563,0.0000023763216,0.000015112853,0.96848303],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99828225,0.00018265822,0.00033501597,0.0002464258,0.00071184756,0.00024180765],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99631506,0.0019721726,0.00072001544,0.0006605878,0.00028990366,0.00004225298],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016309317,0.00019485109,0.00036093834,0.000016786878,0.0008198176,0.000052146766,0.0025534166,0.00025670117,0.00009293562],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00019446039,0.00011304334,0.000291331,0.000006101606,0.0017467331,0.00011075381,0.0003762434,0.00034010794,5.1475064e-7],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00089802506,0.00007588137,0.0000619647,0.000059451435,0.00029511715,0.0000032310147,0.061710984,0.00004383995,0.000035625002,0.7312916,0.047786076,0.15773821],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00029606637,0.000048725233,0.0005242416,0.00015882078,0.00013656751,2.3849174e-7,0.00063799816,0.0000040824248,0.00006495232,0.006238076,0.9917708,0.00011940174],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.62187785,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9758256,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94398475,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00033208428,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00078768464,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6435911},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2528514554","doi":"10.3138/9781442685345-011","title":"6. Responsible Government and the 1850 Upper Canada Jury Act","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"University of Toronto Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Government (linguistics); Political science; Law; Philosophy","score_opus":0.017049102991136794,"score_gpt":0.22888880506163653,"score_spread":0.21183970207049974,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2528514554","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000050763585,0.0033529305,0.0000064838673,0.00036915598,0.00014026392,0.00029336376,0.00007782523,0.000021912734,0.9956873],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.004512679,0.0014320546,0.00021268998,0.00013419904,0.00006586419,1.4453231e-7,0.0000010750218,0.000011815331,0.99362946],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982805,0.00010167499,0.00014164469,0.0002796257,0.0009972858,0.00019923599],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99876446,0.00040597635,0.0002624767,0.00033324986,0.00012096724,0.00011289633],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004117608,0.0001783546,0.00032064054,0.000009005813,0.0005013964,0.000041301886,0.00064209336,0.00019502881,0.0003576194],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000696338,0.00016358073,0.00009276804,0.0000012838245,0.0006634942,0.0001018881,0.00022240261,0.00016476143,0.000001339657],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00085965946,0.000007829895,0.0000035658807,0.000027350494,0.00018387214,0.000044837623,0.010969365,0.0000021220415,0.000002526862,0.78687614,0.053590734,0.14743201],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00042427512,0.000021957656,0.00009752882,0.00008882132,0.00012578239,7.899978e-7,0.00047977336,0.0000013273878,0.000009489185,0.0024565347,0.9961194,0.0001743244],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9215388,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98520464,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94252867,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006924877,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012692199,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6670628},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2549189372","doi":"10.1080/03050718.2016.1259077","title":"Aboriginal oral testimony, hearsay rule and the reception theory of admissibility","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Commonwealth Law Bulletin","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Hearsay; Law; Admissible evidence; Political science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.033796973113345584,"score_gpt":0.3644389456552977,"score_spread":0.33064197254195216,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2549189372","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.74205303,0.0026084112,0.0024276217,0.14650811,0.0006938808,0.0011497973,0.00004674636,0.0002737023,0.10423872],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.995414,0.0004741719,0.0013158786,0.0010133537,0.00009174741,0.000016216469,6.668045e-7,0.000010616499,0.0016633068],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99744445,0.0012992371,0.00033563923,0.00024896706,0.00039138898,0.00028034352],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9966801,0.002478887,0.00015099095,0.0003493812,0.00019235657,0.00014830561],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0061099734,0.00010641778,0.00024792523,0.000027617043,0.000546352,0.000048125105,0.00037399185,0.000088746114,0.0014205573],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0014375987,0.00005760242,0.00004900675,0.00016530853,0.0021486992,0.00006983789,0.00005315377,0.00012910704,0.00010833074],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00057511707,0.00007357607,0.0030386858,0.000035142075,0.000008085561,0.0000011515101,0.0023589958,4.8476954e-7,0.000043504097,0.8442604,0.009189972,0.14041491],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00092962297,0.000054554817,0.009486329,0.00010393179,0.000013172562,0.0000015838248,0.0003685644,0.0000011907057,0.00010455032,0.14866075,0.8401744,0.00010135874],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0017136188,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0010084017,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8309844,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000564715,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00021127252,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994923},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2550511362","doi":"10.1080/1068316x.2016.1258473","title":"Attributions in the courtroom: the influence of race, incentive, and witness type on jurors’ perceptions of secondary confessions","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Psychology Crime and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Verdict; Incentive; Attribution; Psychology; Witness; Social psychology; Duty; Race (biology); Perception; White (mutation); Political science; Law; Sociology; Gender studies","score_opus":0.0427089870762819,"score_gpt":0.4069202867636826,"score_spread":0.3642112996874007,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2550511362","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9702762,0.00019064583,0.000044635366,0.007250158,0.000083819825,0.00012845638,0.0000247245,0.0000058565397,0.021995552],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99824333,0.00046703703,0.000022614588,0.0011056041,0.000016481528,0.000007564857,9.0372833e-7,0.0000026273433,0.0001338428],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9991387,0.0003008867,0.0001630172,0.0001431738,0.00012874744,0.00012547169],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987356,0.0008408585,0.00008391833,0.00018040193,0.00013316235,0.000026028232],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006124338,0.00005664322,0.000118346274,0.000044314227,0.00032029528,0.000010071158,0.00021528483,0.00007308181,0.00018817214],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00024171582,0.000027827857,0.000016338674,0.00022831642,0.0020992304,0.00010257874,0.000033120225,0.000120989826,0.000008252289],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000124978,0.00021314419,0.03305353,0.000011602191,0.000017675644,0.0000020800694,0.011477203,0.0000018526565,0.0034492945,0.9405432,0.0034974003,0.0076080495],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003526431,0.00011119882,0.931406,0.000068093366,0.000015681344,0.0000031795464,0.0025306644,1.6905828e-7,0.00004058968,0.025120946,0.04029634,0.00005450588],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00012574867,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00042367564,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.91542226,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000005571814,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006213137,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7734702},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2553642309","doi":"10.1080/23311908.2016.1264657","title":"Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cogent Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":11,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Psychology; Relevance (law); Verdict; Perception; Scientific evidence; Eyewitness testimony; Jury; Social psychology; Law; Epistemology; Political science","score_opus":0.4132805861461013,"score_gpt":0.48979912496622885,"score_spread":0.07651853882012755,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2553642309","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9917661,0.0025716869,0.0005120783,0.0018986556,0.00038302725,0.00033971336,0.000019114716,0.000024665014,0.0024849689],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99830896,0.00031651466,0.0010061138,0.00011613593,0.000046009627,0.00001719621,5.293785e-7,0.000006792608,0.00018172202],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99752563,0.00088607066,0.00059026416,0.00037679388,0.00036257104,0.0002586935],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9953594,0.0035673648,0.00034030853,0.00039166515,0.0002725492,0.0000687187],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0053927675,0.000097859505,0.00033230212,0.0002084886,0.00027971767,0.00003849774,0.0005353,0.00009779867,0.00041503244],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011198448,0.000060237875,0.000059106766,0.00064444414,0.0028180988,0.00019070963,0.00011015845,0.0000846358,0.00002490848],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00012535123,0.00034368515,0.4796817,0.00003719429,0.00003163852,0.0000031653428,0.014708264,0.0000043142522,0.31450024,0.033460196,0.004504571,0.15259966],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004498953,0.00008022476,0.8632381,0.00023552838,0.000033650846,0.0000045983757,0.0023539565,0.000014561143,0.0010058947,0.12506959,0.0073757777,0.00013823836],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00009112556,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00047893063,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.38355637,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000031373154,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00019094443,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99989563},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2564568891","doi":"","title":"RECENT DOCTORAL GRADUATES IN CANADA AND THE U.S.A: INDICATORS FROM THE CANADIAN AND U.S. SURVEYS OF EARNED DOCTORATES","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Political science; Library science; Geography; Sociology; Computer science","score_opus":0.04974381444586684,"score_gpt":0.2839088774922678,"score_spread":0.23416506304640095,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2564568891","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9852919,0.0015894434,8.374621e-7,0.0107098,0.00011583542,0.00016735739,0.000022934713,0.000006412717,0.0020955005],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9969233,0.002440146,0.0000327281,0.00042963453,0.000025694357,0.0000047833296,0.0000026058824,0.000004495009,0.0001365762],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9983215,0.0006937159,0.00021098743,0.00016216091,0.00037466828,0.00023701387],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99795127,0.0016072202,0.00008646654,0.0001355946,0.00007804685,0.00014142605],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0015528324,0.00008379952,0.00017060718,0.00006500224,0.0005523746,0.0000624996,0.00028663527,0.00004386125,0.00014016329],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009870325,0.000044977183,0.000011285466,0.0006183607,0.00088893645,0.00008484672,0.000045018412,0.00012468734,0.0000011387114],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00000845218,0.0000034103182,0.97205484,9.875686e-7,0.000008838394,0.0000052098903,0.00542298,0.0000020217092,5.0286064e-7,0.0016816237,0.0019510892,0.018860023],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00030350022,0.0000044815515,0.96570885,0.00000772374,0.0000042751694,6.8226586e-7,0.002882781,0.0000075948606,0.000027083775,0.0024128752,0.028565625,0.00007454794],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.999921,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9999975,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.026614536,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00017852642,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0040979977,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.72696716},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2577507033","doi":"10.1017/cjlj.2017.8","title":"When Procedure Takes Priority: A Theoretical Evaluation of the Contemporary Trends in Criminal Procedure and Evidence Law","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University; Tel Aviv University; University of Toronto; Hebrew University of Jerusalem","keywords":"Discretion; Flexibility (engineering); Procedural law; Law; Substantive law; Political science; Criminal law; Judicial discretion; Criminal procedure; Law and economics; Legal practice; Sociology; Economics; Judicial review","score_opus":0.12494761606815333,"score_gpt":0.40590318473112375,"score_spread":0.28095556866297045,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2577507033","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92418206,0.010012864,0.000013791243,0.022332884,0.00055440323,0.0004495234,0.000011496597,0.000007238346,0.042435765],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991834,0.00003976011,0.00017869801,0.0003260131,0.00015116413,0.0000057258335,1.216179e-7,0.000010155608,0.00010491942],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9972593,0.00043241895,0.0005121444,0.00023353573,0.0012409374,0.00032164008],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971592,0.00027315764,0.0007637594,0.00036917144,0.001041238,0.0003934932],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0043729693,0.0001408826,0.00029561445,0.00014884051,0.000973466,0.0004257729,0.0013705541,0.00015104926,0.00012461514],"category_scores_gemma":[0.005961647,0.000104949475,0.0000830297,0.00019301866,0.0032530748,0.0012590066,0.000043434437,0.00039826325,0.0000012222713],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000106679836,0.00004203701,0.0436371,0.0001691858,0.000025365336,0.00013430478,0.04235008,0.000015438392,0.00008937744,0.893072,0.0014345841,0.018923832],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0022536502,0.00057689013,0.53288054,0.013155999,0.0005512795,0.00058484945,0.012690421,0.0002785639,0.0010993562,0.40631986,0.02869332,0.0009152762],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.015135154,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.37415,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.48924345,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002026001,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007111001,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994595},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2625982006","doi":"10.7202/1054352ar","title":"Drawing the Line Between Lay and Expert Opinion Evidence","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"McGill Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"University of Toronto; University of Queensland","keywords":"Scrutiny; Expert opinion; Public opinion; Political science; Opinion leadership; Law; Scope (computer science); Public relations; Psychology; Sociology; Computer science; Politics; Medicine","score_opus":0.16107188385438675,"score_gpt":0.43328687821239353,"score_spread":0.2722149943580068,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2625982006","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.20119467,0.02686063,0.01048638,0.14716414,0.012800458,0.0010833323,0.00003755726,0.0005416174,0.5998312],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9940815,0.0012030727,0.0008957566,0.0006589541,0.0030242726,0.0000013618974,1.1337857e-7,0.000008640309,0.00012632157],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986398,0.00023244011,0.00021395303,0.0001441135,0.00051532243,0.00025433613],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986879,0.0006829695,0.00012648715,0.00012329017,0.00024498827,0.00013436326],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020609803,0.00007833564,0.00011135199,0.00003327395,0.0074814395,0.00029043583,0.00040077153,0.00006235527,0.00016627563],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00095413584,0.000050067887,0.000037907874,0.0001941176,0.00052234053,0.0005518332,0.000093592505,0.00022267418,0.000046632445],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007287643,0.000044928085,0.0053503728,0.000014338886,0.000071542585,0.00002340228,0.017591657,0.0000083672,0.00025977686,0.16217452,0.008441544,0.80594665],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000857208,0.000070413254,0.0016254638,0.00017771014,0.0000048797992,0.000021433261,0.000873078,0.000005060197,0.00034325576,0.0041380306,0.99257076,0.0000841992],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000514152,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0020083094,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9841292,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000044449,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000024027577,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9938107},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2684191946","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199572120.013.0040","title":"Factors Affecting Lay Persons’ Identification Of Speakers","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Oxford University Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Guelph","funders":"","keywords":"Identification (biology); Psychology; Credibility; Eyewitness identification; Perception; Economic Justice; Affect (linguistics); Social psychology; Communication; Computer science; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.07886255143822955,"score_gpt":0.288012829668765,"score_spread":0.20915027823053545,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2684191946","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0073251175,0.00012645824,0.00023427447,0.000009595715,0.00037868565,0.00030627742,0.000061063634,0.000113164235,0.99144536],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.18668228,0.0001212158,0.000073632065,0.000004611822,0.00010829469,1.345653e-7,0.000009900704,0.000027241724,0.81297266],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99849576,0.000079908496,0.00022600283,0.00032271104,0.00058963144,0.0002859688],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983933,0.00030384123,0.00063405733,0.00032313273,0.00020473042,0.0001409154],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00044506765,0.00023033604,0.00031807445,0.00023383996,0.00047950956,0.000055456854,0.00061363744,0.00039025175,0.00011643232],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000096022,0.00025850127,0.00021115906,0.000021969541,0.00041888512,0.0002211702,0.00017042486,0.00028536347,0.0000023225623],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006370758,0.000026176956,0.0002711464,0.00017929786,0.00019962901,0.000011752061,0.036683757,0.000007724701,0.00010329695,0.92712754,0.0014045232,0.03392147],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011603303,0.000013315999,0.00022160259,0.000103304475,0.00016287976,2.9109552e-7,0.0041854465,8.253269e-7,0.00032171572,0.00036525712,0.9942504,0.00025890887],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001860779,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00013969366,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9928459,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00020900853,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00016901568,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999867},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2750792337","doi":"10.5539/jpl.v10n4p212","title":"Jury Trial as the Atavism of History","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Politics and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Objectivity (philosophy); Law; Jury trial; Political science; Hung jury; Economic Justice; Criminal court; Psychology; International law; Philosophy; Epistemology","score_opus":0.07454942805628886,"score_gpt":0.38922194031476004,"score_spread":0.31467251225847115,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2750792337","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.74849296,0.0014774859,0.000019979756,0.0064456933,0.0022574952,0.00007776125,0.0000035545145,0.0000032147882,0.24122189],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9958246,0.0001888114,0.00010289177,0.00040628572,0.0007153905,1.6959889e-7,2.5678895e-8,0.0000031252548,0.0027587102],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992385,0.00005799853,0.00022047249,0.000038190108,0.00033632328,0.00010854206],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99886763,0.00021667947,0.00049821346,0.00014181189,0.00019792591,0.000077737204],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009827383,0.000036407902,0.00012495747,0.000023299937,0.00043833547,0.00007728461,0.00037390724,0.000042217947,0.000061087296],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00094306166,0.000023041137,0.00005992309,0.000011159486,0.00070624216,0.00015924449,0.000039060833,0.00010941242,0.0000020323778],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013168172,0.000022245262,0.00004007341,0.000004563975,0.000010566374,0.0000065214363,0.0022129768,1.455957e-7,0.000017389106,0.9922964,0.0034074446,0.0018500185],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0014600079,0.00011938074,0.0010550935,0.000025063195,0.000024579067,0.0000070767146,0.00046389244,3.4998772e-7,0.000039607865,0.08624929,0.9105234,0.000032267588],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00067414617,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00013224261,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.90711594,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000044971184,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00037942285,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.33713663},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2752777279","doi":"10.5204/ijcjsd.v6i3.419","title":"Blinded by the White: A Comparative Analysis of Jury Challenges on Racial Grounds","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Journal for Crime Justice and Social Democracy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Indigenous; Jury selection; White (mutation); Racism; Prejudice (legal term); Criminology; Law; Political science; Adjudication; Criminal justice; Adversarial system; Psychology; Sociology","score_opus":0.17353318672495724,"score_gpt":0.48489185323457396,"score_spread":0.31135866650961674,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2752777279","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7440951,0.0023384467,0.0047018086,0.15667135,0.007812438,0.00065708184,0.00040619154,0.00005792596,0.08325965],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9960259,0.0006946699,0.00012487726,0.00045447078,0.0013591754,0.0000064533237,0.000006313295,0.000006683895,0.0013214219],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982105,0.00015781025,0.00034843167,0.00018469701,0.0008926237,0.00020594631],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99719965,0.00081596023,0.0007100241,0.000118114986,0.0010868799,0.000069390844],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011920355,0.00011995459,0.00030415968,0.00020119458,0.0037114639,0.00069314364,0.00099362,0.00010673116,0.00007241364],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011955105,0.00009171663,0.0002420566,0.00010507657,0.0004864703,0.00049019774,0.0000801979,0.00024314209,0.0000043594578],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.001872418,0.00056844164,0.0006846445,0.00005138451,0.0047377753,0.000018952956,0.17871094,0.0000783229,0.00013041914,0.5089868,0.04040308,0.26375684],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004849948,0.0005617237,0.21121551,0.00017306386,0.011800428,0.000019867672,0.1752306,0.0009671466,0.00019000257,0.13717341,0.4568392,0.0009790758],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000043255215,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00029980348,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.41643614,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007381047,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00016360171,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975856},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2752993538","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2995846","title":"The Jury Representativeness Guarantee in Canada: The Curious Case of Disability and Justice Making","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Manitoba; University of Winnipeg","funders":"","keywords":"Representativeness heuristic; Jury; Economic Justice; Political science; Law; Psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.02800313257102953,"score_gpt":0.38090880895771956,"score_spread":0.35290567638669,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2752993538","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98790896,0.0035114451,0.000120550234,0.0068369415,0.00033164732,0.00013773929,0.0000023003122,0.0000033988395,0.0011470218],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99618304,0.0034959433,0.0000099165045,0.000033690303,0.00013190036,0.0000033615122,3.7163424e-8,0.000006070157,0.00013604054],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99774873,0.00043531318,0.00028343435,0.00015504219,0.00037922472,0.0009982503],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9979163,0.0011928707,0.00038723208,0.00035227186,0.00012169301,0.000029638342],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0058248495,0.00008140169,0.00013987829,0.000015787222,0.003293636,0.0002099259,0.0007582935,0.000031433996,0.000004624659],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0027410206,0.000047734695,0.000034368568,0.00010821636,0.00090721896,0.00022630866,0.000108834145,0.00087942556,3.771284e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002010347,0.00005691965,0.05579348,0.00002534528,0.00007773101,0.000256599,0.0074301893,0.000093062285,0.000007981413,0.40725634,0.00010232158,0.528699],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007594886,0.000066379616,0.106601626,0.000097409786,0.00010567765,0.0018303526,0.1906305,0.00014663994,0.000020528121,0.6942858,0.005224452,0.00023116816],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6608138,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9973906,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.52846783,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012105826,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008475964,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99800396},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2775458088","doi":"","title":"Canadian criminal cases annotated","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Books | Encyclopedia of Canadian Laws","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminology; Political science; Psychology","score_opus":0.05113030441340591,"score_gpt":0.32971104360092,"score_spread":0.27858073918751414,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2775458088","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11102478,0.00018260168,0.0000019389688,0.002932466,0.00072562415,0.00024540574,0.00018621692,0.000036633428,0.88466436],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9570808,0.00033697145,0.00037347636,0.00055156334,0.00033996353,0.000013887519,0.000010387292,0.000028087125,0.041264884],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9979063,0.000085644366,0.0003235501,0.00033043567,0.00046946082,0.0008846022],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9968795,0.00017650836,0.00022314287,0.0006878546,0.00032983342,0.0017031176],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005424878,0.0001830935,0.00027754233,0.0008715577,0.0022153885,0.0002933677,0.0012158502,0.0001900403,0.0008244222],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002529519,0.00020324465,0.00008175648,0.00024000995,0.0004939602,0.00043026233,0.000038321316,0.0001720558,0.00012610006],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000049582435,0.000048255093,0.07548293,0.00011342215,0.00009789523,0.0032161155,0.017981717,0.0000126645755,0.000013636897,0.27988183,0.26204136,0.3610606],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012230278,0.000027547008,0.04509799,0.000044273973,0.000029965937,0.000009632698,0.0008442564,0.0000011614374,0.000011963909,0.0017257605,0.95183927,0.0002458667],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9984332,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9999374,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.846056,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004939288,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008849951,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9990836},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2784248453","doi":"10.5430/jms.v9n1p1","title":"How to Manage Issues Relating to the Use of Trial Experts: Standards for the Introduction of Expert Testimony through Judicial “Gate-Keeping” and Scientific Verification","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Management and Strategy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Variety (cybernetics); Engineering ethics; Law; Relation (database); Process (computing); Expert witness; Political science; Computer science; Engineering; Artificial intelligence; Data mining","score_opus":0.15346489261957638,"score_gpt":0.4064861796348923,"score_spread":0.2530212870153159,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2784248453","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.80926377,0.0033491896,0.105643906,0.073495105,0.003655484,0.0029289327,0.00002103069,0.000025073927,0.0016175021],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9881502,0.0004714677,0.008149434,0.000105233186,0.0015707324,0.000013313346,5.198817e-7,0.0000075349913,0.0015315731],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99862343,0.000097682096,0.0003571972,0.00016168208,0.00062652,0.00013349668],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99856365,0.0002322006,0.00037111944,0.00015819067,0.0006372008,0.00003764501],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024278304,0.00007411909,0.00016470838,0.00012063983,0.0005988873,0.0005215361,0.00023498008,0.000032367476,0.000010811178],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011636604,0.00004537418,0.00004007528,0.0003918777,0.00032479677,0.00053295726,0.000056593886,0.0000492915,2.1131535e-7],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00861724,0.0001497439,0.00009592704,0.000111983616,0.00023449822,0.0000027708406,0.07515911,0.0009865982,0.0011333751,0.06863563,0.28343266,0.56144047],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0014725334,0.00088740204,0.0007783019,0.000094404255,0.0000714632,0.0000011109181,0.028276857,0.00013840532,0.00038284727,0.00436899,0.96344054,0.000087129],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00009623942,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000197899,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6800079,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000031658463,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000043598047,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5029185},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2789812690","doi":"","title":"Developing the Law of Evidence: a Proposal","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"TSpace (University of Toronto)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Political science","score_opus":0.18171574127310045,"score_gpt":0.3601858371233501,"score_spread":0.17847009585024967,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2789812690","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.19967422,0.0013450657,0.004701543,0.008717498,0.00031004776,0.00044255468,0.0000030232284,0.000101890924,0.78470415],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.983385,0.00025406675,0.013813402,0.0000294658,0.000016630189,9.490195e-8,8.836614e-8,0.0000030834503,0.0024981285],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99921143,0.00012161703,0.00006417024,0.00011719291,0.00034471127,0.00014089148],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992549,0.00015644214,0.00014957527,0.00017272394,0.00022712062,0.000039243037],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00059489784,0.000052155836,0.00011883794,0.00001346137,0.00037390427,0.000007453999,0.00062155235,0.000056040593,0.0053678188],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00015365073,0.00004221935,0.000051352676,0.000104449275,0.0006412055,0.00057679566,0.00012490769,0.00004664325,0.000015504476],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009000997,0.000032745636,0.0009989492,0.000038317194,0.000029145365,0.0000049240525,0.31967703,6.549765e-7,0.00010062926,0.63677615,0.0004534153,0.04179805],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00047629536,0.00023638373,0.31923902,0.0005647684,0.00012415767,0.0000020989787,0.62191427,0.000017510578,0.0010611307,0.011687944,0.044266727,0.00040967556],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3097739,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.34059334,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.78371084,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00011937068,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00040563135,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9955414},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2794420646","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.2017.0035.r1","title":"The Role of Defendant Race and Racially Charged Media in Canadian Mock Juror Decision Making","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Salience (neuroscience); Race (biology); Psychology; Verdict; Jury; Social psychology; Racial profiling; Criminology; Law; Sociology; Political science; Gender studies","score_opus":0.06947264793910002,"score_gpt":0.3450419761909217,"score_spread":0.2755693282518217,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2794420646","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9833622,0.0070435624,0.0003195735,0.0030449454,0.00086318824,0.00019428405,0.000033220287,0.000013315522,0.0051257093],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9937092,0.0020145045,0.0028735243,0.0008385228,0.0004472924,0.000008904958,0.000001642518,0.00003463657,0.00007177826],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955087,0.00080263853,0.00091487175,0.0004401429,0.00021978244,0.0021138645],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9909955,0.0050552054,0.0005993738,0.0003427531,0.0010119383,0.001995176],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004830172,0.00033418232,0.00062961003,0.0011704254,0.0014329016,0.0002087389,0.0010993915,0.0005879758,0.000090303256],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02869374,0.0003136283,0.00009973581,0.00031389127,0.0026544838,0.00035470707,0.00007792718,0.0010440752,0.0000063764073],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00074656773,0.000051181392,0.013756263,0.00060825027,0.00011517114,0.0034380585,0.22597654,0.00009309137,0.0004555207,0.38566992,0.0009614191,0.368128],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013068839,0.00090312253,0.29086003,0.001357308,0.004573501,0.004839717,0.51275903,0.0003270891,0.00036253213,0.09912463,0.08258299,0.0010031383],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.21273497,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98527896,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.772544,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0011005314,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01358549,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999316},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2804938249","doi":"10.1177/1365712718782990","title":"Gender discrimination and juries in the 20th century","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The International Journal of Evidence & Proof","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Political science; Politics; Franchise; Law; Inequality; Sociology; Jury selection","score_opus":0.1937705289059404,"score_gpt":0.4461225939343225,"score_spread":0.25235206502838214,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2804938249","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.88968813,0.0046214513,0.0015009744,0.096423954,0.001760871,0.00024274822,0.0000017259013,0.000008872755,0.00575125],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9968737,0.0010036045,0.00024215513,0.00090607035,0.0008371599,0.0000024098345,1.0645601e-7,0.000003228389,0.00013157022],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99815,0.00023719379,0.00027356436,0.00007918705,0.0011505145,0.00010954014],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980258,0.00084415235,0.00027514808,0.00008518094,0.0007440708,0.000025699352],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003485133,0.00005548476,0.00007303263,0.000101266276,0.00019659082,0.0002646514,0.001078583,0.000027735281,0.000069406946],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0028781195,0.000025944679,0.000033956647,0.00016760544,0.000436522,0.00080879004,0.00007453947,0.00015974062,0.0000067861033],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006598383,0.00023966504,0.040535655,0.000026244576,0.000119359116,0.00008112573,0.30695683,0.000034709366,0.00068509777,0.19411716,0.019162731,0.4373816],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00062736165,0.00039319874,0.3808137,0.0013239268,0.00008875352,0.00028779154,0.054841314,0.000102824044,0.0011662655,0.28343683,0.27662155,0.00029649018],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007356226,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00056958565,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.43708512,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006544963,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00023444681,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3445586},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2806823626","doi":"10.2143/lea.234.0.3159742","title":"Formal Philosophy and Legal Reasoning: The Validity of Legal Inferences","year":2016,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Logique et analyse/Logique et analyse. Nouvelle série","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Deontic logic; Epistemology; Consistency (knowledge bases); Completeness (order theory); Normative; Hierarchy; Computer science; Law; Philosophy; Political science; Artificial intelligence; Mathematics","score_opus":0.05553705934285063,"score_gpt":0.34542843117822586,"score_spread":0.2898913718353752,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2806823626","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6268211,0.007593338,0.067918986,0.15193897,0.0023295186,0.0013587065,0.0003794914,0.00044315928,0.14121674],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.969686,0.011182552,0.0039234245,0.001770701,0.00080434175,0.000055483106,0.00002246822,0.000070167436,0.012484872],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98736167,0.0061444575,0.0018674794,0.0014320416,0.0016979789,0.0014963774],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98908883,0.0062403646,0.0017486088,0.0012181149,0.0011823872,0.00052168587],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01245659,0.000981708,0.0016426815,0.0006003713,0.001076861,0.0005792387,0.0019835199,0.0011969769,0.0014360114],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007095464,0.00062270317,0.0009028239,0.0027887793,0.0037861886,0.0030391545,0.00092317275,0.0015303557,0.00011083465],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00026125883,0.0005701756,0.051523834,0.00021435528,0.0010900652,0.0001758312,0.0066081225,0.00032026798,0.00036183532,0.89880955,0.0069928817,0.03307185],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004623865,0.0044289506,0.08983351,0.0036922398,0.004953775,0.000284372,0.041383535,0.0019449512,0.009467995,0.48419112,0.34921783,0.0059778597],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006105611,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02905416,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4146184,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002851979,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0030091968,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996224},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2806966099","doi":"10.1525/rh.2018.36.2.179","title":"Whately on Authority, Deference, Presumption and Burden of Proof","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Rhetorica","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Deference; Presumption; Rhetorical question; Epistemology; Argumentation theory; Fallacy; Dialectic; Burden of proof; Persuasion; Serendipity; Philosophy; Law and economics; Political science; Law; Sociology; Linguistics","score_opus":0.07185462328303666,"score_gpt":0.3775306845842566,"score_spread":0.30567606130121994,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2806966099","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7897955,0.00034884448,0.0005923831,0.001297903,0.00094978424,0.0003513998,0.000006367146,0.000118649215,0.20653912],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99599284,0.00010925877,0.0005706556,0.00001361464,0.00036146236,0.0000050667336,4.5945427e-7,0.000005606547,0.0029410396],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99899966,0.00009095221,0.00014290656,0.00018938712,0.0004166242,0.00016044601],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993269,0.00015826759,0.00009503082,0.00013876978,0.00021174707,0.0000693238],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000480638,0.000064347456,0.00011290239,0.000075471755,0.00023626882,0.000058107114,0.0001872718,0.00008462484,0.000137001],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00055617193,0.00005685574,0.000019678724,0.00028885444,0.00022038603,0.00015234771,0.000050507344,0.00006419377,0.000066790744],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00021706746,0.00019642923,0.0061490946,0.000091994014,0.00003392578,0.0000033293534,0.043741006,0.0000070561446,0.0009807737,0.2433409,0.012499145,0.6927393],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00042243124,0.00080076704,0.031160194,0.00023030746,0.000034747245,0.0000015020479,0.0017985133,0.00009204521,0.0043054824,0.0689248,0.891865,0.00036419556],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00019353235,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000119935,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.87936586,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000035934332,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000088971065,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23185098},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2809255349","doi":"10.1177/0093854818776998","title":"What Makes Race Salient? Juror Decision-Making in Same-Race Versus Cross-Race Identification Scenarios and the Influence of Expert Testimony","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Criminal Justice and Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":12,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Verdict; Psychology; Race (biology); Salience (neuroscience); Eyewitness testimony; Social psychology; Convict; Criminology; White (mutation); Perception; Eyewitness identification; Law; Political science; Sociology; Gender studies; Cognitive psychology","score_opus":0.055950390351163184,"score_gpt":0.4222295531914381,"score_spread":0.36627916284027495,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2809255349","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9963475,0.0016628094,0.00023340163,0.00043927284,0.000844318,0.0003574145,0.0000041762846,0.000030790892,0.00008032104],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.996352,0.0011580556,0.0018754171,0.00022858556,0.00015122005,0.00004509147,9.056041e-7,0.00001474342,0.00017398356],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9979357,0.0001810127,0.00047782296,0.00046205724,0.00062572886,0.000317693],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99573135,0.002999735,0.00029517265,0.00033087182,0.0005503555,0.00009253701],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014396111,0.00017489928,0.00026117367,0.00014094113,0.000793299,0.0007824131,0.00045384336,0.00013756192,0.00003240118],"category_scores_gemma":[0.006312726,0.00013843042,0.00003897075,0.00045756545,0.0021826276,0.0013872067,0.00017688783,0.00018216432,0.000018077304],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.002983551,0.00044996064,0.008048565,0.00037866645,0.0000129207665,0.000040762156,0.18342313,0.00015840765,0.0033963828,0.0032634733,0.00032333995,0.7975208],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0034085296,0.00039025745,0.7466383,0.0018525735,0.002776287,0.000023285158,0.23882066,0.00036320585,0.0011890599,0.0019932003,0.0018509369,0.00069368107],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00036435566,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0014309438,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.79682714,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005134626,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001315317,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.80419827},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2810149445","doi":"","title":"How does expertise really work ? Linking quantitative and qualitative analysis","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"International Centre for Comparative Criminology","funders":"","keywords":"Computer science; Work (physics); Qualitative analysis; Quantitative analysis (chemistry); Data science; Qualitative research; Engineering; Sociology; Mechanical engineering","score_opus":0.04549453623323229,"score_gpt":0.3560378168465499,"score_spread":0.3105432806133176,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2810149445","genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.17119469,0.0054212827,0.65462077,0.1000961,0.0005589921,0.00093827816,0.00018168321,0.0005968543,0.06639135],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.90712535,0.0019788262,0.06803636,0.00008882418,0.00004696633,0.000088291905,0.00008942813,0.000041357198,0.022504568],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9818469,0.015023299,0.0005480476,0.0011218492,0.0009734795,0.0004863987],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98418385,0.009287277,0.0009517298,0.0014099523,0.0038887276,0.0002784727],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.013054546,0.00037457957,0.00065133726,0.00055084156,0.001031896,0.0016863811,0.0013969628,0.00042226465,0.000098574106],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012227179,0.00029864674,0.0002995155,0.001414573,0.0011099485,0.0003939206,0.0012365268,0.0005271307,0.000016045246],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000033347107,0.00016602552,0.002758725,0.00009161395,0.00053383555,0.0000059371496,0.57198006,0.000008003494,0.00015485889,0.33667067,0.00039003498,0.08720692],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00199284,0.00000334186,0.020318862,0.019181885,0.0019966988,0.0000028205832,0.1505507,0.0016388489,0.010089714,0.6704508,0.11921461,0.0045588613],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0014721213,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.014370795,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7359307,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00021070195,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005043604,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999466},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2810719757","doi":"","title":"CIVIL JURY TRIALS - ASSESSING NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGES - CIVIL JURY REFORM","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Canadian Bar Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Law; Damages; Political science; Supreme court; Jury trial; Civil procedure; Duty; Economic Justice; Privilege (computing)","score_opus":0.16038809630419473,"score_gpt":0.4029041945838013,"score_spread":0.24251609827960655,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2810719757","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0006438472,0.18526168,0.000020571722,0.10798739,0.0009174985,0.0012135168,0.000047470614,0.00012501147,0.70378304],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6330986,0.30593437,0.0005115644,0.030130554,0.0016925154,0.000130245,0.000020026655,0.00011198799,0.028370136],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99575776,0.0013550785,0.00083327247,0.00041372605,0.0008092372,0.0008309563],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99700284,0.0007859563,0.0004243325,0.00087799685,0.00023640004,0.0006724786],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.010225442,0.00028058205,0.0008616173,0.0001903819,0.0019786742,0.0005489804,0.0014274037,0.00017363616,0.007884474],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0047712503,0.0001946238,0.00027128623,0.0011573542,0.00041012795,0.0006064007,0.000080858146,0.00043416535,0.0015452767],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000014562091,0.000017374214,0.000027203292,0.00046883023,0.000038100785,0.00005695651,0.0012205313,6.8405683e-7,0.0000034167576,0.011682399,0.44535115,0.5411319],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010420736,0.000012223815,0.00060801196,0.0025677914,0.00013165352,0.000010105542,0.00031083098,0.000005559464,0.0000032933772,0.001887155,0.9940777,0.00028148034],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.050239015,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6449754,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6754129,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009540462,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016364441,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9993206},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2810768571","doi":"10.23907/2017.044","title":"A Brief History of the Expert Witness","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Academic Forensic Pathology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Ottawa Hospital","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Witness; Expert opinion; Law; Forensic psychology; Admissible evidence; Political science; History; Criminology; Psychology; Medicine","score_opus":0.07606509712946034,"score_gpt":0.3701755410477138,"score_spread":0.2941104439182534,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2810768571","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.84283227,0.005322287,0.00035552206,0.012137919,0.0082775615,0.00032217373,0.000006182997,0.00011135411,0.13063471],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9874252,0.00030887328,0.00024344424,0.0013494493,0.0002698643,0.000011426067,2.7309758e-7,0.000010584262,0.010380904],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9987296,0.00018167195,0.00023678177,0.00023536205,0.00033268772,0.0002838826],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99853915,0.00019033316,0.00043522418,0.0006623221,0.00012109911,0.00005189913],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00086885993,0.0000895639,0.00020456786,0.000040220104,0.0004497233,0.00000861811,0.0014872791,0.00032191118,0.0000802397],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003636703,0.00006637214,0.00007529746,0.00005834456,0.00396076,0.00018660727,0.00027962483,0.00036550796,0.00002071773],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006011696,0.000038804625,0.0256329,0.000023354234,0.000022330007,0.0000559485,0.06569808,0.0000028959605,0.0052853897,0.40572327,0.24024488,0.257212],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00031821305,0.00002330825,0.05150599,0.000068161724,0.00001599584,0.00003181369,0.00090522494,0.0000049494283,0.00078176765,0.06635842,0.8798191,0.00016703966],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00039494745,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00027468137,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6395742,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00016053558,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005277911,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9987499},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2889056253","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.2017-0047.r2","title":"The Influence of Witness Intoxication, Witness Race, and Defendant Race on Mock Juror Decision Making","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Eyewitness testimony; Verdict; Psychology; Eyewitness identification; Indigenous; Race (biology); Criminology; White (mutation); Social psychology; Law; Political science; Sociology; Gender studies","score_opus":0.07620801820199738,"score_gpt":0.3588550105829719,"score_spread":0.28264699238097457,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2889056253","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9881218,0.002093188,0.0035759523,0.003699728,0.0006307008,0.00019567335,0.00001614979,0.000020182168,0.0016466073],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99372447,0.0016332644,0.0029153961,0.0011626254,0.00035456443,0.000011609743,9.838074e-7,0.000032126398,0.00016494367],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9963389,0.00075644953,0.00086332555,0.0004693887,0.00025367434,0.0013182352],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99005353,0.005914493,0.0008659997,0.00044655957,0.0016772891,0.0010421459],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0036092396,0.00033800743,0.00057915127,0.00064967386,0.0018431505,0.00021238696,0.0011597781,0.00047575068,0.000036463865],"category_scores_gemma":[0.024601908,0.00029610223,0.00009085706,0.00029796935,0.004716039,0.0004212275,0.00009782316,0.0009106416,0.000006470782],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0013418831,0.000087315624,0.003731795,0.0012762671,0.00015727426,0.0014119879,0.10857129,0.0014077536,0.00061541033,0.6956688,0.0013389592,0.18439123],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016391597,0.0024965003,0.47974935,0.002810905,0.008272459,0.0069555864,0.3083616,0.00026872355,0.0007240082,0.16008446,0.027358804,0.0012784409],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0035868916,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.11856494,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5355844,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005383833,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0048234137,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999491},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2895299448","doi":"10.22215/etd/2018-12963","title":"Terror in the Justice System: Effects of Defendant Race and Religion on Juror Decision-Making in a Criminal Trial","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Legislation; Criminology; Attribution; Criminal justice; Political science; Race (biology); Terrorism; Law; White (mutation); Psychology; Social psychology; Sociology; Gender studies","score_opus":0.02395066135237804,"score_gpt":0.3874174908427217,"score_spread":0.36346682949034365,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2895299448","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9664659,0.0004724136,0.00010562581,0.000068129615,0.0020500834,0.0014399084,0.00000233148,0.000027804774,0.029367836],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9979231,0.00014186649,0.0008351321,0.00009477853,0.00025278976,0.00008190201,0.00000562799,0.000022086628,0.0006427182],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9968453,0.0006095155,0.00068573764,0.000490104,0.0010662195,0.00030312876],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99184126,0.0071860217,0.0004711078,0.00028610884,0.00017278951,0.000042734344],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024283768,0.0002410609,0.0005061538,0.000536242,0.00025084952,0.00013048213,0.00057882076,0.0003705982,0.000017744596],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009899713,0.00016580094,0.000080576014,0.00070261164,0.00010666565,0.00013531715,0.000032299533,0.00033264715,0.00002100852],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.11170978,0.0013121347,0.00016300382,0.017585443,0.000065172404,0.0005175511,0.4492312,0.000028864093,0.00011720216,0.09450577,0.011703267,0.3130606],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.04953203,0.0066244793,0.040877316,0.09599292,0.003748809,0.000043868473,0.7593378,0.00033498782,0.0007329681,0.028007587,0.011701918,0.0030653058],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005132146,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02218182,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3101066,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00013395424,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003641753,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9984403},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2901436806","doi":"","title":"The Urgent Need to Reform Jury Selection after the Gerald Stanley and Colton Boushie Case","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Acquittal; Jury; Jury selection; Indigenous; Law; Political science; Criminology; Sociology","score_opus":0.0125262628619428,"score_gpt":0.3144553219670812,"score_spread":0.3019290591051384,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2901436806","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.96515584,0.0028114459,0.0009988371,0.026498815,0.00065190153,0.00036463674,0.0000017751199,0.000054208835,0.0034625672],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99131244,0.0019862559,0.000051433908,0.0008660698,0.001037364,0.00001880211,1.1091275e-7,0.000017117147,0.004710423],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99707043,0.00023418848,0.00025961074,0.00019426085,0.0005373052,0.0017041797],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99898446,0.00017932197,0.00013766122,0.00015934093,0.00034800233,0.00019120223],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0051505496,0.00012666556,0.00010939014,0.00007914858,0.0035638656,0.0005267975,0.000334399,0.000078377445,0.00007836693],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00051126024,0.0000701514,0.000055578912,0.0005591295,0.0002934652,0.00025444795,0.00006637796,0.00092981086,0.0000433156],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.001891381,0.00010912227,0.0011809402,0.000007926192,0.0002862557,0.000116457326,0.02378675,0.000009315774,0.00035084144,0.28302544,0.013516682,0.6757189],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00038045974,0.0009084782,0.001101594,0.000031180305,0.000063774016,0.0040623485,0.036790367,0.000025975514,0.00015962542,0.19314952,0.7630098,0.00031687415],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008271116,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.11190954,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7494931,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0015406362,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002675499,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99773335},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2903342625","doi":"10.1007/s11896-018-9305-x","title":"Evidence for the Belief in Live Lineup Superiority","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University; Thompson Rivers University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Eyewitness identification; Psychology; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Identification (biology); Preference; Perception; Relation (database)","score_opus":0.28876531574585557,"score_gpt":0.5389039630554097,"score_spread":0.2501386473095541,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2903342625","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97996837,0.0024537256,0.00070450455,0.014802465,0.0007830836,0.00010270161,0.0000011485031,0.000003979235,0.0011799983],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99232453,0.0021779474,0.0006936077,0.002837278,0.0018279239,0.000002471964,2.3434568e-8,0.000004342961,0.00013187516],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9990832,0.00012548847,0.00028517132,0.00010945651,0.00018676998,0.00020989704],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980469,0.0012598617,0.00017161935,0.00009541786,0.000355659,0.0000705692],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016051729,0.00006119761,0.00015060815,0.00010346179,0.00024425276,0.00004717602,0.00035914005,0.00008228303,0.00008094409],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010021873,0.00004087048,0.00005143658,0.00016403961,0.0005321619,0.00021929295,0.00002453889,0.0001761805,0.000011426603],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0034042678,0.00045118557,0.033998013,0.000100192745,0.00008369399,0.00003449534,0.44089302,0.0000034014922,0.0020176729,0.015109312,0.042026084,0.46187866],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016198668,0.0036867089,0.55819243,0.00042526817,0.00022874627,0.00036348932,0.08128576,0.000018754867,0.00013906801,0.022439385,0.33130962,0.00029089107],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009481315,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0046242117,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5241944,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000020015239,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00013890995,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2580419},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2905402715","doi":"10.29173/alr1258","title":"The Origins, Early History and Evolution of the English Criminal Trial Jury","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Alberta Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Adversarial system; Expansive; Distrust; Criminal trial; Law; Jury trial; Political science; Institution; Criminology; Criminal law; Sociology","score_opus":0.04866074385107201,"score_gpt":0.314241143032203,"score_spread":0.265580399181131,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2905402715","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.062641665,0.71527267,0.000016372398,0.026050953,0.003598606,0.0022459563,0.0000040906484,0.00006222535,0.19010746],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94418675,0.048374236,0.000045892815,0.0040036044,0.00075176934,0.000039321567,4.862208e-7,0.000015086888,0.002582862],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986384,0.00037346972,0.00028331645,0.0001688475,0.00039037186,0.0001455941],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984828,0.0008731233,0.0001979629,0.00021933761,0.00015689257,0.000069837384],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00076030346,0.00007853245,0.00020084882,0.0000053626563,0.0003467433,0.000030950174,0.00046787618,0.0000443065,0.0000710331],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004493337,0.00004431815,0.00009560772,0.00021133634,0.00047384127,0.00014812718,0.00007511863,0.00012451634,0.00001786868],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00016080587,0.000013686437,0.00008295374,0.0003748917,0.000010992922,2.6448544e-7,0.004450311,5.5533103e-8,0.0000016182767,0.952307,0.023885014,0.018712403],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004584164,0.00004184006,0.00019986919,0.0003511676,0.00008784599,2.2301641e-7,0.00014440692,4.2848387e-7,0.0000018167727,0.00065228407,0.9980044,0.000057321282],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0033822907,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0032663457,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.97411937,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00013273282,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00034247735,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5379269},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2906867826","doi":"10.1007/s11896-018-9311-z","title":"The Influence of Familiarity Recency and Eyewitness Age on Mock Jurors’ Judgement","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":8,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Legal psychology; Judgement; Psychology; Eyewitness identification; Eyewitness testimony; Social psychology; Law; Computer science; Political science","score_opus":0.04462723732052665,"score_gpt":0.42039363482063435,"score_spread":0.3757663975001077,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2906867826","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9883567,0.00033702547,0.000009309682,0.002435151,0.0003304937,0.000072281,0.0000011198669,0.0000030896977,0.008454815],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99604774,0.002322159,0.00007920035,0.000979099,0.000104891995,7.5877915e-7,5.1482733e-8,0.0000043430314,0.00046176522],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99882644,0.0001750809,0.00035125678,0.00012756701,0.00032665842,0.00019300767],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99877656,0.00040453262,0.00036061168,0.00014389362,0.00022662833,0.00008779789],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010747216,0.00007978212,0.00019895399,0.000097354474,0.00017674494,0.000038507533,0.0003109263,0.00008016104,0.000017918459],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00021031556,0.00005308815,0.000038039358,0.00015907522,0.00039357424,0.00014459984,0.000039136787,0.00022198097,0.000008109961],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0043344516,0.0013513496,0.12955521,0.0005055966,0.00031944856,0.000107892156,0.19255905,0.00016145167,0.015464021,0.17118154,0.02390982,0.46055016],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00069836975,0.0011792727,0.90217125,0.000119751894,0.00006714234,0.000056831956,0.012402418,0.0000011396781,0.00008632641,0.023162117,0.059922908,0.0001324691],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00033997977,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00022859783,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.772616,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001466249,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006840099,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2164872},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2911482230","doi":"10.1016/j.scijus.2017.08.004","title":"What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be? II","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Science & Justice","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"Division of Mathematical Sciences; Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council; Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences","keywords":"Judgement; Objectivity (philosophy); Transparency (behavior); Psychology; Computer science; Subjectivism; Bayes' theorem; Actuarial science; Applied psychology; Cognitive psychology; Social psychology; Bayesian probability; Artificial intelligence; Computer security; Law; Epistemology; Economics; Political science","score_opus":0.10203652695733109,"score_gpt":0.42943924598135286,"score_spread":0.32740271902402174,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2911482230","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.360329,0.0010469983,0.007874512,0.22118771,0.032774303,0.0014901723,0.000026203144,0.0007546034,0.3745165],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98833394,0.00036143154,0.0036036319,0.002990977,0.000673956,0.000018948465,9.305288e-7,0.000011500387,0.0040046596],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99654436,0.00006517716,0.00022998282,0.00058846374,0.001860772,0.00071126205],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973701,0.00027648846,0.000363364,0.0008490818,0.0008259481,0.0003149777],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.003517754,0.00014170933,0.00015933515,0.00016182504,0.0136202425,0.0044004247,0.00210419,0.000097441814,0.00025564263],"category_scores_gemma":[0.013011321,0.00013057486,0.000052905812,0.00065858214,0.003005313,0.010397593,0.00047016997,0.00022419158,0.00020162137],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007504935,0.00039687814,0.00050283264,0.000088220324,0.000021000718,0.00008042038,0.06952955,0.00015024426,0.0055948887,0.4916493,0.063147284,0.36876434],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00069045817,0.00025680708,0.009764959,0.00037823984,0.0002916445,0.000022534205,0.10259747,0.00079061225,0.0052190013,0.077789456,0.80119973,0.0009990677],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00037785654,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002595904,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7380525,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001506938,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0017981491,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99970794},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2939475958","doi":"10.3917/caph1.155.0021","title":"Statistiques, probabilités et justice","year":2019,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Cahiers philosophiques","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Canadian Nautical Research Society","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Philosophy; Mathematics","score_opus":0.08517357361466085,"score_gpt":0.3997285763827074,"score_spread":0.3145550027680466,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2939475958","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.1262535,0.04108134,0.002025065,0.20708266,0.010296961,0.0020159744,0.0002652153,0.00080977567,0.6101695],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8989401,0.005603327,0.01720825,0.016655143,0.0022272624,0.000055194057,0.000030223724,0.00011957749,0.059160914],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955868,0.0011620619,0.0006214278,0.00088557263,0.0009482381,0.00079588685],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9966139,0.0013832349,0.00033538323,0.00066969055,0.000617315,0.0003804698],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.001651869,0.00043636074,0.00054868317,0.00017618836,0.00040086068,0.00025240975,0.0008085112,0.0006824044,0.00229999],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0016831113,0.00046779204,0.00017587011,0.00079230726,0.001951027,0.0011960947,0.00011900726,0.00095105515,0.003103805],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004605997,0.00015445947,0.00015963797,0.0006299508,0.000047020883,0.000031219635,0.011402397,0.00004340735,0.0000672058,0.9470387,0.021845782,0.01853414],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021737452,0.00020139044,0.00029505137,0.00030866236,0.00011305339,0.0000065767167,0.0010903603,0.00003272131,0.00007727244,0.56481016,0.43242577,0.0004216294],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00019285193,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0000958811,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7726866,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00065469946,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008217214,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997774},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2947425977","doi":"10.53300/001c.5667","title":"Public Duty versus Private Information: Jury Privacy in the Information Age","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Bond Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"Criminology Research Advisory Council, Australian Institute of Criminology; Australian Institute of Criminology","keywords":"Jury; Impartiality; Duty; Personally identifiable information; Political science; Information privacy; Secrecy; Business; Law; Internet privacy; Public relations; Computer science","score_opus":0.11809618728811012,"score_gpt":0.37737603986446366,"score_spread":0.25927985257635355,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2947425977","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0035515523,0.008301848,0.00025227637,0.02683004,0.0009147967,0.0016234226,0.000009392574,0.00016803651,0.95834863],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9068517,0.033968057,0.002544198,0.055390485,0.00065066875,0.00023429205,0.00009402669,0.000015222969,0.00025137077],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99829173,0.00019119382,0.0005148638,0.00008383519,0.00065327535,0.0002650824],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99886245,0.00021303615,0.00025244575,0.00037557152,0.00023736186,0.0000591216],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00262805,0.00010198313,0.00017900746,0.00006303862,0.00044030085,0.00045939806,0.0007735848,0.00006623412,0.00030774644],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0024197856,0.000069910166,0.00005722281,0.0010130305,0.00026652453,0.004112588,0.000097138545,0.00014003173,0.001504908],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000077201785,0.000010845228,0.000017568025,0.0002923769,0.0000032399305,8.7662926e-7,0.0035688286,4.6419522e-8,6.380989e-8,0.78568447,0.028698627,0.18171534],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001903204,0.00002662995,0.00073784793,0.00038128067,0.000009716442,0.0000012125857,0.0001718957,8.327714e-7,0.0000011845631,0.0027467208,0.9956381,0.000094256764],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00010114856,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005417534,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96693945,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006633235,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001940465,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992725},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2947841871","doi":"","title":"Lessons from Batson in a Comparative Criminal Context: How Implicit Racial Biases Remain Unaddressed in Canadian Jury Section","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"American Indian Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Section (typography); Jury; Context (archaeology); Criminology; Jury selection; Criminal justice; Political science; Psychology; Sociology; Law; History; Computer science","score_opus":0.06197672831554635,"score_gpt":0.3839202890378551,"score_spread":0.32194356072230873,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2947841871","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.985094,0.00013458416,0.000019250225,0.004653804,0.0006557451,0.0002709362,0.00007938095,0.000021735044,0.009070565],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9979857,0.000054223587,0.0002027983,0.0011012007,0.0005105479,0.000010864958,0.000010168817,0.000020515803,0.00010394636],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9969769,0.0007571774,0.0004094151,0.0003864695,0.0005788486,0.0008911603],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977927,0.0008061324,0.00043327993,0.00018635849,0.00020213082,0.00057940715],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010522627,0.0002131319,0.0005342873,0.00069023145,0.0006843789,0.00047520344,0.0005037616,0.00013221301,0.00047878223],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0006147263,0.0002217018,0.00008255118,0.001481199,0.00060741097,0.0006344779,0.000030092528,0.0008405327,0.000067289024],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00089010276,0.00042600837,0.30953115,0.000027679409,0.00015645465,0.0019103765,0.39813188,0.0006049421,0.0010559164,0.038521312,0.006949759,0.24179442],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002011034,0.0004590894,0.53313255,0.0006759563,0.00003913966,0.000089036104,0.3157791,0.00007180466,0.00027328162,0.0035831153,0.1429465,0.00093937264],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.89244336,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9967908,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.24085505,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001240527,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0021908088,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9040737},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2948864406","doi":"","title":"L’ADMINISTRATION DE LA PREUVE SCIENTIFIQUE EN DROIT NORD-AMÉRICAIN","year":2019,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"The Canadian Bar Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Scientific evidence; Flexibility (engineering); Test (biology); Reliability (semiconductor); Presentation (obstetrics); Empirical evidence; Law; Civil procedure; Political science; Economics; Epistemology; Management","score_opus":0.036384542030782084,"score_gpt":0.3572678166669413,"score_spread":0.32088327463615923,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2948864406","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.018019857,0.30523428,0.00014387399,0.26937473,0.0022645132,0.002613867,0.00009009144,0.00006315605,0.4021956],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7056256,0.07378136,0.00050265784,0.013546587,0.0004484421,0.000060296537,0.000011354456,0.00004540548,0.20597833],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99622625,0.0019846156,0.00035019562,0.00035472188,0.00046962357,0.00061458984],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9976372,0.0009489544,0.00017735604,0.00054800493,0.00017177993,0.00051670073],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.008227618,0.00017338477,0.0003035668,0.00007519635,0.00055990793,0.00033128652,0.0010037696,0.00021621058,0.004138166],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001967973,0.00014949686,0.00013009802,0.0010522204,0.0005782005,0.0002391523,0.000043138018,0.00038996144,0.0049988106],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000027642577,0.000029587865,0.0005187999,0.0023552792,0.00003035958,0.000039753286,0.004406412,0.000015764765,0.000006083632,0.66900575,0.089423954,0.2341655],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000050761308,0.000022077675,0.0012464992,0.003547814,0.0000727507,0.000030289464,0.00013885183,0.000032642656,0.000008150605,0.011120088,0.9835455,0.00018461607],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.060635265,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.49439263,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8941215,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001472519,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006389982,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99924284},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2950453274","doi":"","title":"A survey of police eyewitness identification procedures","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"QSpace (Queen's University Library)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Eyewitness identification; Criminology; Identification (biology); Psychology; Computer science; Data mining; Biology","score_opus":0.016509182700833524,"score_gpt":0.2768271508450127,"score_spread":0.2603179681441792,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2950453274","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.821841,0.00014410313,0.0004323947,0.01181784,0.0018920089,0.001480961,0.00036833299,0.00094333885,0.16108002],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.67177206,0.00031161102,0.00016712614,0.00003042155,0.00007784254,0.0000012024778,0.00061282405,0.00003926624,0.32698762],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99728274,0.000679249,0.00030786655,0.0005693403,0.00080657686,0.0003542493],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99739563,0.0005547773,0.0008433599,0.00044875417,0.0005761815,0.00018129312],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00038987232,0.00027668424,0.00046029707,0.00065153046,0.0004988723,0.00017657041,0.0012840775,0.0005269161,0.00034854363],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0008109889,0.00033166166,0.0001324159,0.0017237583,0.00023040993,0.0014055083,0.000095454976,0.0002898577,0.000083360435],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0014520026,0.0005746503,0.071404874,0.0028089215,0.00033802175,0.000025088459,0.056997705,0.000068976646,0.00004034529,0.051422805,0.8062026,0.008664045],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00040353384,0.000069529604,0.7686869,0.0006036895,0.00016610808,5.6779697e-8,0.022201357,0.0000018566705,0.0019078198,0.0012054783,0.20385687,0.0008968194],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.10963619,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04162391,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.697282,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000089552304,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0019836368,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999135},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2953829111","doi":"10.1177/0269758019862684","title":"Book review: Victim participation rights: Variation across criminal justice systems","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Review of Victimology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Université de Montréal","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal justice; Variation (astronomy); Criminology; Political science; Economic Justice; Law; Sociology; Physics","score_opus":0.03053903218464716,"score_gpt":0.4328153472536417,"score_spread":0.4022763150689945,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2953829111","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.003623292,0.90697265,0.003358081,0.012751625,0.007997359,0.0016867971,0.000047704118,0.00011234234,0.06345015],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.15459082,0.7850187,0.000748304,0.04848446,0.0009092167,0.0002674972,0.000091591784,0.000033343113,0.009856093],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99723095,0.00046354972,0.0008521946,0.00032426667,0.0008624136,0.00026665066],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9969265,0.0006898156,0.00074738025,0.00028298688,0.0012809613,0.00007234687],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020544564,0.00013780266,0.00044596966,0.00007261978,0.00014872379,0.00003732898,0.00059810973,0.00010889383,0.004956089],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0027266268,0.00012300437,0.000120406716,0.00029259798,0.00012445227,0.00047244845,0.00007991206,0.00014408398,0.0008784592],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001811647,0.0006787428,0.0012485682,0.079811886,0.0004407866,0.000036154364,0.01088041,0.0002801023,0.00017983788,0.20234467,0.67671454,0.027203146],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00015510971,0.000059163984,0.0011334589,0.011429782,0.00022073407,0.000012487998,0.00015769064,0.00009322731,0.000012149442,0.0002862462,0.9863094,0.00013055444],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00022375514,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000026194091,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.30959487,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00017580512,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00017590188,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99989945},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2961763347","doi":"10.1080/00085030.2019.1635738","title":"La position de la Section des documents de la SCSJ sur l'approche logique de l'évaluation de la preuve et le libellé des conclusions","year":2019,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Valuation (finance); Humanities; Philosophy; Political science; Economics","score_opus":0.026778021376680314,"score_gpt":0.3450769874633958,"score_spread":0.3182989660867155,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2961763347","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.96223795,0.0010258254,0.013826681,0.0018946738,0.0004261277,0.00021384937,0.000015152583,0.00002713011,0.020332579],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9144879,0.0018195352,0.08123913,0.00090182066,0.00022201361,0.0000050691065,0.0000019469578,0.000022777802,0.0012998059],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99474156,0.0025319923,0.0003968079,0.00035961423,0.0009268087,0.0010432109],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9957349,0.0020409958,0.0004049353,0.0001808862,0.0006985251,0.00093979156],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.02557372,0.00021495354,0.00025396142,0.00022010528,0.0024214939,0.0009598175,0.00071225956,0.0006634202,0.00015245029],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0024982726,0.00023142723,0.0002492052,0.0012914699,0.008578486,0.0016994305,0.000092944596,0.0010453912,0.0000077994455],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000050488474,0.0003411687,0.14537963,0.00029131488,0.00015791942,0.000073481635,0.43811646,0.016228361,0.044328734,0.032027688,0.029791672,0.29321307],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002013816,0.00044807518,0.34525478,0.002515838,0.00023883642,0.0044941176,0.09158386,0.0118773,0.019790275,0.48179054,0.039045833,0.00094672537],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.040069196,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.026868032,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.44976285,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00640374,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03019108,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9988772},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2970661682","doi":"10.3917/cdlj.1901.0099","title":"La retransmission en direct des procès","year":2019,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Les Cahiers de la Justice","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Institut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Political science; Art","score_opus":0.011714001941808033,"score_gpt":0.3176175058639469,"score_spread":0.30590350392213883,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2970661682","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.51294756,0.01331984,0.0036224192,0.0014449207,0.0013001261,0.00029015425,0.000013628982,0.00018214335,0.46687922],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8454021,0.0043549202,0.009829874,0.0005231026,0.00042395023,0.000010020757,0.0000020039276,0.00005042727,0.1394036],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99570006,0.0022361344,0.00029090358,0.0004813014,0.00063908397,0.00065249193],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9927238,0.0064200405,0.0001409077,0.00028444946,0.00014952743,0.00028126588],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0030560377,0.00025757717,0.00030640492,0.00010650535,0.00061014324,0.00025895968,0.0006311241,0.0011313205,0.00095783296],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0032514757,0.00025608717,0.00012976788,0.00092343776,0.0021070244,0.00044032442,0.000058603684,0.0010523952,0.0006440427],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00017472611,0.0002460503,0.004722178,0.003256578,0.00008924862,0.00019871038,0.14756642,0.00053826004,0.001061431,0.1309926,0.00817598,0.7029778],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00038951365,0.00009002507,0.0065737027,0.0009107824,0.0004505619,0.000047608763,0.016395869,0.00024222376,0.00041263527,0.015046605,0.9590209,0.0004195646],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00027628292,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00011274987,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.95084494,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006691026,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004116545,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99998915},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2978167827","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/m3s5p","title":"The biases of experts: An empirical analysis of expert witness challenges","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Jurisprudence; Witness; White paper; Position (finance); Affect (linguistics); White (mutation); Political science; Law; Psychology; Business","score_opus":0.17629518312731257,"score_gpt":0.4634438026629984,"score_spread":0.2871486195356858,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2978167827","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9602416,0.0032156224,0.00014367254,0.002216166,0.00015410435,0.00011512522,0.0000023583777,0.000042813535,0.033868544],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99687034,0.0016641777,0.00024852777,0.00010513143,0.00003557891,0.000005811143,8.341212e-7,0.00000548838,0.0010640925],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99850655,0.00021526105,0.0002773628,0.00020522642,0.0006238039,0.00017180109],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974585,0.001665163,0.00014154514,0.00040534342,0.00026990642,0.00005953683],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00080015545,0.00007369343,0.0002803718,0.00015592598,0.00013692277,0.000029325955,0.00054233626,0.00006928836,0.0006650819],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00075728365,0.000043540436,0.00011743995,0.0009330784,0.00035974456,0.00019086974,0.00005337299,0.000031354753,0.000007136112],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00026972961,0.0011502096,0.07205595,0.00004723369,0.0014141295,0.0000033000938,0.2794831,0.00060390943,0.0014937997,0.17925876,0.004620591,0.4595993],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005765489,0.0005148493,0.09329509,0.00011625604,0.00037804258,6.0968677e-7,0.6704756,0.0015734094,0.0064263935,0.007405951,0.21858333,0.0006539316],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005375141,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0041318107,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.45894533,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000152481225,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00010905862,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7282181},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2985133514","doi":"","title":"Juries, Miscarriages of Justice and the Bill C-75 Reforms","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"TSpace","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Indigenous; Jury; Economic Justice; Jury selection; Law; Political science; Representation (politics); Indigenous culture; Sociology; Politics","score_opus":0.05644045913293249,"score_gpt":0.3885880789877472,"score_spread":0.3321476198548147,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2985133514","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3246644,0.006232692,0.00075454806,0.33130196,0.0005638065,0.0006252343,0.000011340508,0.0002456709,0.33560032],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99395233,0.00047727572,0.0006627173,0.00093585503,0.00017163853,0.0000030769854,3.0169156e-7,0.00000647958,0.003790308],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99924815,0.00008885727,0.00011215083,0.00012670322,0.00029642865,0.00012771305],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99919415,0.00044516096,0.000086921675,0.00011581259,0.0000846619,0.00007328697],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005380225,0.000056777888,0.0001318744,0.000015013081,0.00022863882,0.000047378046,0.0002491645,0.00004195974,0.00011045666],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0020483898,0.00002834576,0.000026663858,0.0002905571,0.0005393508,0.00008029195,0.00007567137,0.000078092926,0.000023730676],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0004930199,0.000032754204,0.00045672205,0.00028075196,0.00005277022,0.0000062990734,0.56099856,0.000031569478,0.0006066249,0.33517528,0.06266967,0.039195966],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008415968,0.000059926948,0.0008726478,0.000038661197,0.0001150185,9.0735955e-7,0.103621036,0.000049437254,0.00094264426,0.00992799,0.8833696,0.0001605135],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00066529633,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00011422255,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.82069993,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000008743189,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000078964906,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24522619},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3002573560","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.2018-0057","title":"Social Identity in the Canadian Courtroom: Effects of Juror and Defendant Race","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Race (biology); Psychology; White (mutation); Criminology; Indigenous; Identity (music); Social psychology; Plaintiff; Law; Political science; Sociology; Gender studies","score_opus":0.08680718064480779,"score_gpt":0.36285422444360554,"score_spread":0.27604704379879774,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3002573560","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9851977,0.002681406,0.00016680971,0.006913118,0.0006117401,0.00029788175,0.000017968756,0.0000093920935,0.004103975],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99603015,0.0006873747,0.0006994643,0.0021633252,0.00023809631,0.000010078124,0.0000023120026,0.000024760506,0.00014443339],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99603176,0.0011794065,0.0006437064,0.00037266742,0.00023229583,0.0015401418],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.994503,0.003046813,0.00048812627,0.00026054916,0.00054161024,0.0011598682],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003917252,0.00029532125,0.00064387335,0.0009804039,0.00088343606,0.00021631781,0.0010524152,0.0005835261,0.00006427442],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008571903,0.000281872,0.00011597328,0.00029824677,0.0014817156,0.0005088508,0.000050468283,0.0012525888,0.0000071282743],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00020256011,0.000077707875,0.011865528,0.0042738863,0.0001257814,0.006792366,0.27833557,0.000116807605,0.0002873065,0.67455226,0.0018578179,0.02151237],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0017124105,0.0008655999,0.52394444,0.0006821968,0.007053122,0.004701019,0.40990433,0.00006179148,0.00011671889,0.02893742,0.021216895,0.00080409803],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.31710634,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.96407276,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.64696646,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009984814,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009750481,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99996334},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3007701601","doi":"10.37566/20707-6849-2019-4(29)-5","title":"The Jury in Ukraine: topical issues of reform","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Slovo of the National School of Judges of Ukraine","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Hung jury; Jury selection; Political science; Law; Jury trial; Legislation; Population; Sociology","score_opus":0.0501358305602001,"score_gpt":0.37445515125522133,"score_spread":0.32431932069502123,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3007701601","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7983471,0.003023636,0.000012084684,0.1488417,0.00026310098,0.0004510179,0.00007073168,0.000022065937,0.048968576],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978009,0.00031007687,0.000768348,0.00031204984,0.00017954594,0.0000035633122,0.0000010189177,0.0000062226204,0.0006182948],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9975678,0.00014331537,0.0006178604,0.00014103632,0.0013822588,0.00014778548],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99774706,0.00068150717,0.0005746871,0.00015913963,0.0007776243,0.000059965478],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014202063,0.00008593095,0.00027889933,0.00007318436,0.00009581034,0.000010405347,0.0010000238,0.00008727054,0.00016113208],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011513708,0.000052824304,0.000133887,0.0006942408,0.0005557809,0.00013789708,0.00018723893,0.00016473004,0.000005465534],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0016229235,0.0010185661,0.10635726,0.00077453867,0.00041293935,0.0000032604805,0.018985737,0.0016705842,0.019151362,0.7373865,0.07983824,0.03277807],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0019035314,0.0003981173,0.6087192,0.00045256742,0.000056025056,0.0000016155383,0.006157435,0.00014726477,0.023947138,0.09097848,0.26687923,0.00035932873],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00031919067,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004671036,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.646408,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008342315,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00035332114,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99681276},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3010319517","doi":"10.22584/nr50.2020.009","title":"The Quest for Representative Juries in the Northwest Territories","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Northern Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Institute for Circumpolar Health Research","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Imprisonment; Indigenous; Law; Sentence; Face (sociological concept); Constitutional right; Sociology; Colonialism; Political science; Perspective (graphical); History; Criminology; Supreme court; Social science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.08112130028856021,"score_gpt":0.4120073541437871,"score_spread":0.33088605385522685,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3010319517","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.013926406,0.3057124,0.00015132106,0.66483366,0.00069981016,0.004804183,0.00008384557,0.00014491654,0.009643429],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.73143,0.2326899,0.00021020396,0.030290052,0.0025582158,0.0013959297,0.000024611965,0.000060678187,0.0013403948],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99797136,0.00076070894,0.00032948516,0.00021085604,0.00047463912,0.00025294317],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9963545,0.0028693252,0.00018869442,0.00037086668,0.00017506426,0.000041514326],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0026740672,0.00011704073,0.00021440622,0.0000076179444,0.0011351045,0.00020047349,0.001376942,0.000029302082,0.000020284353],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003954814,0.000048537415,0.000109929184,0.00055338634,0.00052540033,0.00013006334,0.00007263463,0.00017081661,0.000052233732],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013576302,0.00009402519,0.04685098,0.001245756,0.00009740959,0.000015222532,0.256922,0.0000146996945,0.0000020351642,0.10576229,0.05464792,0.5342119],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000574705,0.000027657195,0.0028141479,0.00026660407,0.000032764747,7.352059e-7,0.0070944917,0.0000012315847,0.000002682825,0.0056187827,0.9840055,0.00007793447],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002105658,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.15681705,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9293576,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000025211431,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00018596895,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.87304205},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3017253864","doi":"10.1080/00085030.2020.1748284","title":"Comparing jury focus and comprehension of expert evidence between adversarial and court-appointed models in Canadian criminal court context","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Trent University","funders":"","keywords":"Adversarial system; Jury; Context (archaeology); Criminal case; Criminal court; Law; Focus (optics); Comprehension; Criminology; Psychology; Jury instructions; Political science; Computer science; History; International law","score_opus":0.1354321480218602,"score_gpt":0.3449763169649397,"score_spread":0.20954416894307948,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3017253864","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98367697,0.0018733082,0.0004727284,0.012833551,0.00022892676,0.00020682455,0.000016655213,0.000008812018,0.0006822227],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9934521,0.0004974589,0.004961995,0.0009050965,0.00016789873,8.773845e-7,5.160441e-7,0.000008960088,0.0000051165243],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99732953,0.00008564445,0.00052575103,0.00036294307,0.000924898,0.0007712053],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99652076,0.00030643918,0.0002838443,0.00012628885,0.00063388876,0.0021288032],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022289709,0.0001593715,0.00046176376,0.00029130373,0.0009228804,0.0001831929,0.00060943456,0.00013092798,0.000026786936],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007637234,0.00016401563,0.00008990214,0.0009330226,0.0032135188,0.001073282,0.00008021345,0.00038930873,7.495082e-7],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00016661394,0.000032178807,0.21269222,0.00019500586,0.00009979492,0.000091530645,0.4232856,0.0007039989,0.0023698723,0.007616432,0.03573085,0.3170159],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0052401093,0.0010209192,0.44880784,0.0051395507,0.00027161767,0.00021759883,0.4207187,0.075116955,0.0043914877,0.016352698,0.020682542,0.0020399792],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6781933,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.83894104,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.31497592,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00065650896,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008277401,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99949914},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3018039839","doi":"10.22215/etd/2014-10348","title":"Educating the Jury: Mental Illness and Criminal Responsibility in the Canadian Courtroom","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"University of Oxford","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Psychology; Perception; Certainty; Mental illness; Stigma (botany); Social psychology; Criminology; Mental health; Psychiatry; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.03318301141460317,"score_gpt":0.3927252008536272,"score_spread":0.35954218943902405,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3018039839","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.77073675,0.00023375079,9.693225e-7,0.0050429837,0.00091333775,0.00046803974,0.000007723068,0.00001573645,0.22258072],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9905755,0.000028781278,0.000060935115,0.0008958951,0.00019460231,0.000040998453,0.00003598072,0.000011319035,0.008155981],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99774224,0.00073101715,0.0002446204,0.00031612426,0.0006300993,0.00033591245],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99820036,0.0011378268,0.00012691687,0.00028428942,0.00014781425,0.00010278155],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004619797,0.00014836539,0.00016937815,0.00013547232,0.0021734396,0.00044050434,0.00067441934,0.00019349577,0.0002667894],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002243149,0.00008644829,0.000037464968,0.00033700943,0.00022078204,0.00009817974,0.000016418315,0.00039082312,0.000017247374],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013727022,0.000062158404,0.0040014195,0.0001034643,0.000016461083,0.000007702469,0.6341083,0.0000011692784,0.0000070424644,0.096794665,0.027636597,0.23712371],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010253182,0.000023574315,0.16107705,0.000098657074,0.00003727109,0.0000035798935,0.5907782,0.0000067600495,0.000015601843,0.011130618,0.23642664,0.00029952498],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.47672167,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99619013,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5194685,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00023303434,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0029857338,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9991256},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3018650203","doi":"10.1093/mind/fzaa007","title":"Statistical Evidence, Normalcy, and the Gatecrasher Paradox","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Mind","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Counterexample; Luck; Statistical evidence; Epistemology; Relation (database); Philosophy; Empirical evidence; Mathematical economics; Positive economics; Economics; Mathematics; Econometrics; Computer science; Discrete mathematics; Data mining","score_opus":0.10091684705617752,"score_gpt":0.37622276479943617,"score_spread":0.27530591774325863,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3018650203","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.72336847,0.0047753295,0.015812855,0.15258527,0.00050460745,0.00087740226,0.000024513316,0.00011377434,0.101937756],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.996501,0.000106068714,0.0012792569,0.0012415859,0.00015387619,0.0000053675462,2.7137014e-7,0.0000041463773,0.00070839154],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9991096,0.00015119537,0.00011322217,0.00015125642,0.00032124462,0.00015345364],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99851733,0.0012292097,0.00003323411,0.00007227674,0.000041372732,0.00010657571],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005849965,0.000052175335,0.00009663373,0.000010996378,0.00025148172,0.00014091084,0.00019929842,0.000036201833,0.0010351847],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00254095,0.00003326121,0.000016115262,0.00018647828,0.0005782066,0.0001350108,0.000057562756,0.00008969893,0.00030646528],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006053584,0.000041512267,0.01614395,0.000053178912,0.00004059315,0.00008017275,0.09639368,0.000020781426,0.000059060298,0.18819967,0.08883502,0.60952705],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00077855703,0.0000617692,0.017275104,0.000049102382,0.000045161774,0.000003139117,0.004583254,0.00034660383,0.000075521624,0.014994052,0.961573,0.00021473452],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007603108,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00010363422,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.872738,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000073582637,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008311061,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999878},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3033047797","doi":"","title":"Safeguarding Trials from Racial Bias","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Circumstantial evidence; Discretion; Relevance (law); Safeguarding; Law; Psychology; Value (mathematics); Criminology; Federal Rules of Evidence; Racial profiling; Political science; Social psychology; Sociology; Race (biology); Medicine","score_opus":0.11492068831164397,"score_gpt":0.4183477619219111,"score_spread":0.3034270736102671,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3033047797","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8815305,0.0074459636,0.03970273,0.006936262,0.005074838,0.00039092725,0.000012844606,0.00025877386,0.05864716],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9851468,0.0019143304,0.0004474172,0.00024516412,0.008814136,0.0000024738076,0.0000012070032,0.000021644712,0.003406813],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99497116,0.0010613075,0.000592078,0.00025945177,0.0008506845,0.0022653106],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977765,0.0011038022,0.0004714402,0.00016729445,0.00033270282,0.00014822326],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.019396797,0.00014541506,0.00038795764,0.0001677371,0.0014727161,0.00035242777,0.0006534396,0.00014966188,0.0009926498],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009004787,0.00012259677,0.00021403076,0.00046497156,0.00021824105,0.00043146568,0.00005291189,0.0011218977,0.00052411435],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002846332,0.000056829802,0.0018927654,0.0000011978011,0.00024999405,0.0000073504525,0.010142336,0.0000029738007,0.00040954005,0.41042775,0.0031742791,0.57335037],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005471374,0.00014761814,0.00034135173,0.00002744068,0.000055770728,0.000015769543,0.00801398,0.0000039341808,0.00022881241,0.7529948,0.23743683,0.00018657272],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00049107295,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.014420422,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.57316375,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00086868607,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0059844838,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999206},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3034377938","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3426796","title":"Mock-Jurors’ Self-Reported Understanding of Canadian Judicial Instructions (Is Not Very Good)","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Manitoba; University of Winnipeg","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Law; Political science; Social psychology","score_opus":0.04400115742976465,"score_gpt":0.30230577846830964,"score_spread":0.258304621038545,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3034377938","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.90642923,0.0003610595,0.00063718535,0.0047071977,0.0018719324,0.00026050623,0.00001009516,0.000081151244,0.085641645],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.994753,0.0014960557,0.000111201596,0.00013207746,0.00029987446,0.0000012058271,0.0000011364401,0.00002131504,0.0031841407],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9965735,0.00012432763,0.00043975894,0.00022872549,0.0007548835,0.0018788031],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99888587,0.00009614442,0.00036754148,0.00018631037,0.00022468371,0.00023942988],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021200613,0.00013523601,0.00023452747,0.00086006516,0.0008537959,0.000105308914,0.00042819633,0.0001621726,0.0003454784],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00025300984,0.00013969526,0.00013000464,0.0014354608,0.00011661358,0.00040045218,0.0000264948,0.001159296,0.00006465584],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004578169,0.000049063092,0.011972405,0.000009425442,0.0004515974,0.000010853096,0.0051807617,0.00005132337,0.00023631736,0.97553575,0.00097939,0.005477321],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00095360103,0.00029213162,0.0034651349,0.000082698374,0.00018534978,0.00030212678,0.04996681,0.00003155918,0.00025005423,0.8766569,0.06734579,0.00046788435],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06300551,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5542858,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.49128032,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0035150219,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.018822586,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.98673975},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3038973478","doi":"10.7202/1070089ar","title":"Le jury de common law comme héritier du jugement de Dieu : la vérité du verdict peut-elle être motivée?","year":2020,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Revue générale de droit","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Verdict; Philosophy; Jury; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.03879801041255471,"score_gpt":0.29640643696404095,"score_spread":0.25760842655148625,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3038973478","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.39567065,0.008621283,0.004419962,0.19912687,0.0013469564,0.0008848827,0.00030297445,0.00052250014,0.38910392],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97783685,0.0025016936,0.0017603296,0.008821172,0.001909666,0.000053341104,0.000028999979,0.00010385404,0.0069840946],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9957239,0.00097570725,0.0006770036,0.0007223516,0.0006131804,0.0012878788],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9972225,0.0010169913,0.00029976177,0.0005097942,0.00017320507,0.00077774783],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016260601,0.0003581623,0.0007185251,0.000081524166,0.0011118391,0.0003864032,0.0012810685,0.0004938459,0.00055438484],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00047955813,0.0005687991,0.0003766432,0.0008708552,0.0008644917,0.0005230448,0.00050379615,0.000786686,0.0005642009],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00014793768,0.00084482867,0.024209568,0.0010024209,0.00018856139,0.001338185,0.02783099,0.001288698,0.00014057888,0.82834417,0.08123081,0.033433225],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010836606,0.0002381708,0.006804365,0.0005917329,0.00022562829,0.00017355513,0.004122333,0.0033409062,0.00043873393,0.1059794,0.87620944,0.00079205964],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0023602606,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0021066908,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7949786,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006463637,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008724866,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99967635},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3042292873","doi":"10.5539/ijel.v10n5p131","title":"A Contrastive Study of Heteroglossia in the Reasoning of Criminal Judgments of Chinese Mainland and Hong Kong","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Journal of English Linguistics","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Mainland China; Negotiation; Mainland; Heteroglossia; Action (physics); Sociology; Psychology; Linguistics; Social psychology; Political science; China; Law","score_opus":0.03414388170464462,"score_gpt":0.36423708933018245,"score_spread":0.33009320762553784,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3042292873","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9955803,0.00013203947,0.0001420973,0.000036230103,0.0010045547,0.000088061875,0.000013985097,0.0000019409106,0.0030008047],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9980386,0.00003840228,0.0006236194,0.00003957723,0.0012520107,4.7920497e-7,4.163139e-7,0.0000046320947,0.0000022968884],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9981454,0.00016174202,0.00062195753,0.00008233479,0.0009060033,0.00008257748],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9921166,0.0008733155,0.00078168104,0.000048327496,0.00613223,0.000047857902],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00095124135,0.000071569164,0.00024899398,0.00011418492,0.000032616343,0.000037333753,0.00047832495,0.00003331564,0.000010558475],"category_scores_gemma":[0.085249856,0.000052368716,0.00004581741,0.00014385188,0.0001423213,0.00006218218,0.000057235604,0.00017942688,8.530379e-8],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0007267935,0.0006918058,0.7479413,0.000054901022,0.00022815946,0.00011509963,0.24380393,0.00069606025,0.0000523692,0.004196739,0.00015159308,0.0013412521],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0064566536,0.0021382435,0.79067266,0.00086900505,0.00025804422,0.000006643031,0.18932514,0.00042655627,0.00034436112,0.0051832683,0.0040425397,0.000276878],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007807633,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000090015696,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08429861,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002293324,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00011892844,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9224555},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3085748981","doi":"10.1080/13218719.2020.1793819","title":"Jury decision-making: the impact of engagement and perceived threat on verdict decisions","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Psychiatry Psychology and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Psychology; Conviction; Conservatism; Social psychology; Perception; Politics; Biology and political orientation; Relevance (law); Political science; Law","score_opus":0.06431032613786801,"score_gpt":0.423674804267659,"score_spread":0.359364478129791,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3085748981","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.90322506,0.00327672,0.0007057245,0.015347856,0.0008680617,0.00037115283,0.000022727692,0.000069695554,0.07611302],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99105006,0.0014099712,0.0016233504,0.0056617833,0.00021255772,0.000007970964,8.3013896e-7,0.000013976191,0.00001951594],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99829936,0.00034748384,0.0003093085,0.00045127826,0.00031714336,0.00027540053],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99764186,0.001659418,0.00013404958,0.00032860477,0.000068523535,0.00016754582],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00080812286,0.00017485634,0.00026120892,0.00006453553,0.00091290794,0.000064008054,0.0004195099,0.00016439894,0.00039767622],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005874517,0.000111935275,0.00011747313,0.00034819994,0.00079997134,0.00011027486,0.00009552122,0.00033921516,0.000037606576],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0022768385,0.00059049786,0.043378796,0.000022622049,0.00029847454,0.000014156129,0.025052598,0.00009826121,0.00007627131,0.40146413,0.12783542,0.39889196],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001314856,0.0012117776,0.6886084,0.00020602357,0.000083938416,0.00001578491,0.0029393006,0.000036573765,0.0000011790502,0.20829284,0.09695221,0.0003371256],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000036577712,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000099150544,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6452296,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000012222746,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00009234498,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7021442},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3088385331","doi":"","title":"Intoxication, a Drunk Science: Expertise in Cases of Sexual Assault regarding Capacity to Consent","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Plaintiff; Jurisprudence; Criminology; Sexual assault; Narrative; Scientific evidence; Psychology; Forensic psychology; Federal Rules of Evidence; Law; Social psychology; Political science; Human factors and ergonomics; Poison control; Medicine; Medical emergency; Epistemology","score_opus":0.08160498571841732,"score_gpt":0.37625138556792975,"score_spread":0.29464639984951246,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3088385331","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98575675,0.0005989346,0.0036960917,0.008225713,0.00014410836,0.00015746996,0.0000012858924,0.000027404969,0.0013922544],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99865615,0.00023897926,0.00038673772,0.000386586,0.00018888606,0.0000048542056,1.3525353e-7,0.000008446996,0.0001292408],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.996736,0.00018456465,0.00039833557,0.00028984173,0.0010259509,0.0013652876],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987439,0.00020547525,0.00019489371,0.00012626749,0.00047083144,0.00025864522],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004745085,0.00009990978,0.0001977965,0.0002502022,0.00047213712,0.00011157837,0.0006278831,0.00006447462,0.000029396517],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009036546,0.00009411695,0.000034357687,0.0016227792,0.00040503548,0.00039029223,0.000064325315,0.0007931683,0.000016840118],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00047405416,0.00036416404,0.022166222,0.000056036577,0.00008552298,0.000052040774,0.21407907,0.0006790553,0.08533799,0.45451665,0.0024863067,0.2197029],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0044196066,0.0043112356,0.010994118,0.0006123352,0.00013328587,0.0008234474,0.51623267,0.00065426726,0.040991627,0.390834,0.027800066,0.0021933147],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00091409544,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009301691,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.30215362,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0013108255,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0094646765,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99931073},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3099820230","doi":"10.22215/etd/2020-14314","title":"Mock Jurors’ Perceptions of Eyewitness Evidence: The Role of Familiarity with the Defendant, Race of the Defendant, and Eyewitness Confidence","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Eyewitness identification; Psychology; Eyewitness testimony; Verdict; Perception; Social psychology; Race (biology); Criminology; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.022957169600002793,"score_gpt":0.32710683958499714,"score_spread":0.3041496699849944,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3099820230","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97208506,0.0037004955,0.00033805834,0.0022815408,0.00034657735,0.0013841982,0.00008142668,0.000048005608,0.019734617],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99262625,0.001360569,0.00011874156,0.00007321082,0.00005805916,0.0000511409,0.000008113049,0.000030045347,0.005673891],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99600947,0.0007298404,0.00070092396,0.00052017835,0.001723441,0.000316166],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9940188,0.0025795666,0.001215342,0.00076481025,0.0013337111,0.000087773886],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014683129,0.00033898023,0.0006582009,0.00008580078,0.00091502775,0.00009868961,0.00205985,0.0002802938,0.00018669352],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002037115,0.00016006568,0.0002099801,0.0015010313,0.0021847114,0.00031523587,0.00019120633,0.0006010723,0.0000043756368],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0016027077,0.00047510467,0.1184091,0.0026872084,0.000646365,0.0000052113137,0.48556027,0.0003832983,0.018763246,0.34529862,0.0031964607,0.022972414],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00042188415,0.00023515496,0.3560136,0.0026935206,0.0010252045,0.000008914821,0.59211,0.00018816536,0.01423589,0.026189167,0.006155079,0.00072345894],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0042343517,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.024250438,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.31910944,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000360555,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014209676,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9935545},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3107006628","doi":"10.1080/1068316x.2020.1849691","title":"Juror motivations: applying procedural justice theory to juror decision making","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Psychology Crime and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Procedural justice; Economic Justice; Social psychology; Criminology; Law; Perception; Political science","score_opus":0.08208900195288726,"score_gpt":0.4327062517758477,"score_spread":0.35061724982296044,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3107006628","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.21584885,0.0021031534,0.18892407,0.05923119,0.002246849,0.0023342548,0.000025191077,0.00094950205,0.52833694],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9248374,0.000034434466,0.01103598,0.06349065,0.0003263207,0.00005420967,0.0000010906936,0.000019103976,0.00020082758],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99843365,0.00017277828,0.00026370984,0.00051330915,0.0002769859,0.00033953748],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985538,0.00086052367,0.000081524806,0.000177558,0.00013112913,0.00019546357],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00068365684,0.0001384282,0.00018887444,0.00007944661,0.00082657125,0.00011857825,0.00036704994,0.00013235262,0.00029403562],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022281108,0.00012942875,0.00003795871,0.0005144158,0.00029078775,0.0002542038,0.000097218064,0.0001950951,0.00029523083],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00034382913,0.000067737135,0.00026962184,0.00004803362,0.00002159307,0.000018139686,0.013447799,0.000009405289,0.00045243703,0.6338796,0.023166116,0.32827568],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00055320165,0.00016830499,0.0151910875,0.00012469586,0.000115125935,0.000013676613,0.004994962,0.000014022915,0.00007037813,0.13785544,0.84048826,0.00041087437],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000006196171,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000025223248,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.81732213,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000015516427,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000587227,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6357401},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3115180803","doi":"10.25313/2520-2308-2020-11-6536","title":"CURRENT ISSUES OF JURY TRIAL REFORM IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN UKRAINE","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International scientific journal Internauka Series Juridical Sciences","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Competence (human resources); Jury trial; Political science; Law; Criminal case; Innocence; State (computer science); Psychology; Social psychology; Computer science","score_opus":0.09550165638998351,"score_gpt":0.4573405661094269,"score_spread":0.36183890971944344,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3115180803","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92563117,0.0005232226,0.000021240841,0.011110296,0.010428963,0.00024401415,0.000009637318,0.0000221919,0.052009262],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99479586,0.00092650624,0.0004518472,0.00003342787,0.0009255065,0.000013909361,0.0000011076545,0.000008842667,0.0028429723],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9944971,0.0001051133,0.001156611,0.0006104424,0.0029636521,0.000667068],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9976396,0.0001257647,0.0010274426,0.00022153027,0.00073568436,0.00024995566],"candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.008810625,0.00020738252,0.00037698483,0.00094566727,0.0015713035,0.0035279985,0.0046366877,0.00011653881,0.0007988065],"category_scores_gemma":[0.005144416,0.0001651611,0.00016755493,0.0006696769,0.0048174094,0.003951865,0.0004541277,0.00061556755,0.00003122401],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.013248731,0.0026841508,0.074059986,0.00012205372,0.00007526605,0.00030709192,0.044483937,0.0000647448,0.001532336,0.43936762,0.010299007,0.4137551],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0105815595,0.00093461643,0.072236426,0.0023803266,0.00002574539,0.00012673065,0.021555642,0.00022868859,0.0026387775,0.09016938,0.79828346,0.000838666],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0014241092,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0062438683,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.78798443,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006301108,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00090219325,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997285},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3118573785","doi":"10.22215/etd/2016-11602","title":"Eyewitness Factors Influencing the Mock Juror Decision-making Process: Age, Familiarity, and Social Support","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Psychology; Credibility; Social psychology; Eyewitness identification; Perception; Social support; Developmental psychology; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.0311107507402807,"score_gpt":0.3909929629540393,"score_spread":0.3598822122137586,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3118573785","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8955276,0.00015458536,0.00011859619,0.00027235065,0.0013041475,0.0006123189,0.000030168423,0.00025752542,0.10172272],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97781384,0.00011891562,0.00012696542,0.00026020012,0.00043955373,0.00003178315,0.000039470273,0.00007285014,0.021096399],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9957473,0.0001884313,0.0007021449,0.00081081316,0.0018504846,0.00070078764],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9962218,0.0020048541,0.00059479236,0.00031697314,0.0007403351,0.00012126978],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012038497,0.0004948955,0.00058589154,0.00029113799,0.002979152,0.0007768131,0.0012763009,0.0006259358,0.00078558084],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022011795,0.00030279058,0.00017423616,0.0006870696,0.00044563293,0.00069405173,0.00013796242,0.0005529373,0.00007276398],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003378378,0.00015624033,0.01679249,0.00074170926,0.00023553007,0.000086485044,0.45113376,0.0000034150682,0.000093756375,0.023067739,0.0095543545,0.49779668],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007288889,0.000091795606,0.18308112,0.0018319177,0.00039789933,0.000006034037,0.38409114,0.0000063487264,0.0002889798,0.37902555,0.048012324,0.0024380106],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002824372,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008142784,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.49535868,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00015786989,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001397586,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999424},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3120577566","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/rbwkq","title":"Abbey Road: The (Ongoing) Journey to Reliable Expert Evidence","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Scrutiny; Expert witness; Appeal; Transparency (behavior); Expert opinion; Jurisprudence; Political science; Witness; Law; Relevance (law); Sociology of scientific knowledge; Jury; Engineering ethics; Public relations; Sociology; Engineering; Medicine; Social science","score_opus":0.17314559433412666,"score_gpt":0.45398188195938693,"score_spread":0.28083628762526025,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3120577566","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.09473796,0.0013772309,0.0055545447,0.1052364,0.0024578976,0.0006397137,8.329627e-7,0.00047649702,0.7895189],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.92227626,0.000248044,0.0051547387,0.010895798,0.0012903555,0.000021219768,5.853637e-8,0.00001344973,0.0601001],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99826646,0.0001142881,0.00020101955,0.00027587672,0.00074810104,0.00039422707],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984552,0.00048246668,0.000060760332,0.00040286497,0.00042014816,0.0001785282],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0019529256,0.000092888826,0.00010817751,0.000060723127,0.0011693367,0.00038980407,0.00097028073,0.00006438368,0.0034836875],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004492835,0.00005732574,0.00004288404,0.00075728644,0.0002927621,0.000454641,0.0001554591,0.00009878521,0.0033202283],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000025274458,0.000022937673,0.00052779453,0.000002265201,0.0000064223686,0.0000026858947,0.03211024,0.00000672772,0.00027987626,0.017683595,0.88756496,0.061767202],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000038543567,0.0000640235,0.0014018136,0.000090638736,0.000003015731,0.0000014832312,0.005065436,0.000014867431,0.00093743356,0.0030995873,0.98915976,0.00012341343],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0030289271,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004318126,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.82753825,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006919096,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002968324,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9974558},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121497906","doi":"","title":"Less Evidence, Better Knowledge","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Hearsay; Contextualism; Epistemology; Argument (complex analysis); Context (archaeology); Jury; Admissible evidence; Attribution; Law; Law and economics; Political science; Philosophy; Sociology; Psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.22972193225507423,"score_gpt":0.4165210102328445,"score_spread":0.18679907797777026,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3121497906","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.21815039,0.001903256,0.00048538623,0.03750666,0.00391623,0.0008683728,0.0000051928555,0.0009168877,0.7362476],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9835436,0.0003198466,0.0016264672,0.0024002192,0.0016188821,0.000079378544,0.000019499972,0.000060346858,0.010331788],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99603486,0.0004889427,0.00055599527,0.0007538631,0.001391092,0.00077523425],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99669755,0.00091875624,0.00024029902,0.000587871,0.00095080165,0.0006047049],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.002361385,0.0003486287,0.00038032734,0.00033590748,0.001142962,0.0005947389,0.0010742778,0.000237642,0.0013790288],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0037451102,0.00034588267,0.0001452456,0.0014274038,0.0008672277,0.002117217,0.00016578409,0.00034076508,0.0043481574],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001465776,0.00027510032,0.008216319,0.000055502045,0.000113764014,0.000024572546,0.034195807,0.000059568552,0.00034931462,0.104286715,0.02832918,0.8239476],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00069228734,0.00008190454,0.0033325853,0.00015832197,0.000072574854,0.000007788932,0.012036182,0.000024274805,0.0000929567,0.016524447,0.9663148,0.0006618815],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003005,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0017026772,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9379856,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006279932,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014325816,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998993},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3123288879","doi":"","title":"Does No Mean \"No\" Mean Reasonable Doubt? Assessing the Impact of Ewanchuk on Determinations of Consent","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian women's studies","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Statistics; Mathematics","score_opus":0.04219273539417691,"score_gpt":0.3722720652405301,"score_spread":0.3300793298463532,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3123288879","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9169728,0.0002153964,0.0000020180248,0.0005539406,0.0004216028,0.0002397813,0.00006827334,0.0000244701,0.0815017],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.994449,0.00007086669,0.000111915455,0.00010697935,0.00017714915,0.000027531481,0.0000016526831,0.000013390843,0.0050414777],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982898,0.00017181251,0.00032898472,0.0002278225,0.00045057302,0.00053097657],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9972143,0.0011839677,0.00026227365,0.00027427785,0.00089736556,0.00016778045],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00088840874,0.00016070099,0.00033479682,0.00021807014,0.00092534075,0.000092887545,0.00034134902,0.000059661703,0.00017648417],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0018707528,0.00009207388,0.000102664824,0.00052004395,0.0008978233,0.00016835066,0.000039610404,0.00010282226,0.000026217625],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002144449,0.00091722613,0.12557249,0.0009689437,0.002686205,0.00021946568,0.519944,0.002362021,0.0016770492,0.16077623,0.15639938,0.028262535],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0014787748,0.00082249206,0.09233468,0.0013304875,0.00020232025,0.000004711454,0.70755666,0.000059326252,0.0009943098,0.113187596,0.0806203,0.0014083387],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.040308926,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.29380664,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.25349772,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0010219564,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0017921894,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.96608174},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3125006201","doi":"","title":"The Role of Innocence Commissions: Error Discovery, Systemic Reform or Both?","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Chicago-Kent law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Law and economics; Political science; Law; Economics","score_opus":0.043783397454053255,"score_gpt":0.37561667039468327,"score_spread":0.33183327294063003,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3125006201","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0026216686,0.7483419,0.0000763703,0.020570284,0.0005198785,0.0019823262,0.00002278011,0.00019182746,0.22567293],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.74848074,0.24608585,0.00019207034,0.002544373,0.00011569628,0.000038886334,0.0000031546035,0.000013837048,0.0025254001],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9974945,0.0003291701,0.0007358071,0.00028624208,0.000787753,0.00036648175],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981244,0.00040992035,0.00045701224,0.0006871659,0.00018975395,0.00013174278],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0019434834,0.00017512208,0.00047741825,0.00002560526,0.0008418996,0.00013681976,0.0012103253,0.00008612949,0.00011084846],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0012515667,0.00009044866,0.0001465189,0.0007494832,0.0003945657,0.00037807378,0.000104135346,0.00021286563,0.000065489425],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000031426214,0.00009604719,0.000046145455,0.00075247505,0.000014816463,0.0000032063936,0.0005088399,6.636568e-7,0.000078699195,0.8237155,0.003261292,0.1714909],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000082240134,0.00006399786,0.00014368304,0.009628162,0.000041493076,0.000009779631,0.0006614178,0.0000023098391,0.00008532346,0.009933022,0.97919935,0.0001492285],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00022521184,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00044245212,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.975938,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001464794,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00033997232,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6475296},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3125450080","doi":"","title":"An Investigation of Top-down Vs. Bottom-up Processing in Post-Appellate Review of a Criminal Case","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"review","venue":"Albany law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Ontario Tech University","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Criminal justice; Criminology; Law; Criminal investigation; Criminal case; Battle; Criminal procedure; Psychology; Political science; History","score_opus":0.08130371828390283,"score_gpt":0.433450871712946,"score_spread":0.3521471534290432,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3125450080","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000038512484,0.9946352,0.00000435138,0.00034803204,0.0002980917,0.0025997881,0.000044384018,0.000043961485,0.001987639],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.00008075727,0.99674785,0.0010959059,0.0015463083,0.00016118489,0.00013744361,0.000072627154,0.00006512784,0.0000927974],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9929119,0.0017547394,0.0030172078,0.0007915838,0.0010204217,0.0005041687],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99409425,0.00046397626,0.003066695,0.0010036455,0.0010900195,0.0002813943],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0065364055,0.00058297644,0.0040925625,0.00024278875,0.00020823549,0.00007175879,0.0011902504,0.0005230327,0.00039636705],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0024090088,0.00047461045,0.0006392656,0.0021863277,0.00076759816,0.0006219062,0.000121780125,0.0009416229,0.000055770604],"study_design_candidate":"systematic_review","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000012808157,0.0000239491,0.0000013435791,0.41366112,0.000007612403,0.000047462432,0.00023427597,7.994291e-9,4.4272582e-7,0.0024300143,0.00019918225,0.5833933],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004155082,0.000040086692,0.0000011459645,0.43608597,0.0010013869,0.0001725676,0.000022718417,1.6705087e-7,0.0000014713464,0.0001484729,0.5622226,0.00026187065],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015663893,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0023113694,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.58313143,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00011448001,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002962013,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997706},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3125489618","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/zju8c","title":"Drawing the Line Between Lay and Expert Opinion Evidence","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Expert opinion; Scrutiny; Public opinion; Opinion leadership; Political science; Law; Scientific evidence; Psychology; Judicial opinion; Public relations; Epistemology; Medicine","score_opus":0.268999210002041,"score_gpt":0.4976052744300279,"score_spread":0.22860606442798687,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3125489618","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.4707844,0.013196749,0.013541714,0.27126974,0.0028854918,0.0008906262,0.0000040398263,0.00045801362,0.22696923],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99488306,0.0012272635,0.0006569506,0.00031400155,0.0006819319,0.0000035979756,1.1032108e-7,0.00000396538,0.0022291197],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.999242,0.00006743502,0.00009589539,0.00015153272,0.00029752473,0.00014557638],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986977,0.00080168364,0.000076938064,0.00030190055,0.000067553374,0.000054222986],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011104301,0.000050821,0.00007603485,0.000015850404,0.0021038086,0.0006200421,0.0006022826,0.000045480276,0.000099001016],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0031222575,0.000030759285,0.00001841621,0.000045576446,0.00033164202,0.000563544,0.00017208529,0.0000672019,0.00003522094],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000010071063,0.000011911904,0.07983663,0.000010567794,0.000013970307,0.0000021172784,0.021989534,0.0000020191992,0.000119398166,0.021399833,0.012774105,0.86382985],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012593415,0.000034524277,0.18089512,0.00024320497,0.000005272844,6.7187904e-7,0.003461595,0.000024728948,0.00047211966,0.010428105,0.80412006,0.00018867454],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010981776,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004138621,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.86364114,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000011623525,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006565907,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99919534},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3125582096","doi":"","title":"ERRING ON THE SIDE OF IGNORANCE: CHALLENGES FOR CAUSER TWENTY YEARS AFTER PARKS","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Canadian Bar Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Racism; Ignorance; Prejudice (legal term); Criminology; Harm; Context (archaeology); Appeal; Criminal justice; Sociology; Subconscious; Political science; Law; History","score_opus":0.07487653158287644,"score_gpt":0.3409196910011336,"score_spread":0.2660431594182572,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3125582096","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.025427064,0.4111485,0.000060525737,0.42015427,0.001082604,0.0042579216,0.000078152516,0.00007462054,0.13771635],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9586889,0.033538386,0.000037557653,0.0069390135,0.00015392566,0.00011237748,5.1856733e-7,0.000013900798,0.00051538384],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99890506,0.00027037092,0.00017140686,0.00014117699,0.00025051335,0.00026147102],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987513,0.0005727555,0.000091390735,0.0003723266,0.00009176608,0.00012048702],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024405487,0.000078491474,0.00018840455,0.000028643544,0.00027208726,0.000032469405,0.000497309,0.000043172076,0.00023571754],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013565809,0.000046253448,0.000080910126,0.00014081225,0.00015846414,0.000042081676,0.000016530294,0.00009631245,0.000086950444],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000011959916,0.0000115121875,0.00017463608,0.0010895759,0.000037997106,0.0000033587821,0.0047723926,0.000011357493,0.0000010172018,0.33036393,0.031045293,0.632477],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000337346,0.0000127491085,0.0031470775,0.0012934038,0.00002553004,2.653028e-7,0.00013403891,0.0000018205685,0.0000036036993,0.0044898414,0.9907899,0.00006806829],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011164034,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.56966156,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9597446,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007401851,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00028259456,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9954207},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3126045953","doi":"","title":"Reconciling the Principled Approach to Hearsay with the Rule of Law","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Hearsay; Normative; Argument (complex analysis); Epistemology; Relation (database); Law; Virtue; Philosophy; Political science; Computer science","score_opus":0.03710600548668109,"score_gpt":0.3080877845361767,"score_spread":0.2709817790494956,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3126045953","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.1473775,0.00007694536,0.0025021888,0.052036073,0.00040891173,0.0013181223,0.0000038985145,0.00020639195,0.79607],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9894589,0.000020102485,0.0030205008,0.0053303028,0.00038403727,0.00010042999,0.0000077504565,0.000036142923,0.0016418434],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99702466,0.0004543228,0.00039703344,0.00048964773,0.0011523679,0.0004819822],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9972449,0.0012031604,0.00026454375,0.00070277974,0.00042834596,0.0001562612],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0029799463,0.00023431433,0.00029835355,0.00008385751,0.0019275902,0.00029228616,0.0011380082,0.00009551588,0.000248343],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009789421,0.00013345595,0.00009838015,0.00088321004,0.0011291467,0.0003979707,0.00010844,0.00027212716,0.00019110006],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00014230065,0.00012668368,0.00041948605,0.00004703242,0.00011000602,4.9786433e-7,0.04241199,0.0016356166,0.0006800624,0.89797014,0.00041605803,0.056040097],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00049240055,0.00010993346,0.0026330333,0.00005483007,0.00007553335,0.000005440436,0.0061648614,0.00012497317,0.0002684332,0.004607855,0.9851007,0.00036203666],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00046424504,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001328404,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9846846,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00013409855,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00029011615,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99937177},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3155624735","doi":"10.7202/1073819ar","title":"Le jury","year":2020,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Frontières","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Political science; Humanities; Sociology; Philosophy; Law","score_opus":0.043024495121998706,"score_gpt":0.30671971377737123,"score_spread":0.26369521865537254,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3155624735","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.013517311,0.057542987,0.006205701,0.4102549,0.006255195,0.00024572297,0.00004994144,0.00031039582,0.50561786],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9466057,0.0008213473,0.004562816,0.0055139414,0.002614275,0.0000062554177,0.0000029258772,0.00003202878,0.03984073],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99832815,0.00017898208,0.00024606832,0.00036746165,0.00047404668,0.0004052801],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99920964,0.00015056854,0.00010159164,0.00016049677,0.00009946062,0.00027826653],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002270751,0.00014827665,0.00023726303,0.000029841443,0.0003679525,0.00015128477,0.0005578666,0.00016588141,0.0017616493],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0006611332,0.00016669382,0.00011130217,0.0005643723,0.0004879494,0.00044793723,0.00013011172,0.00020160807,0.003922528],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000017447885,0.000054022752,0.00032847843,0.00004848165,0.000023935789,0.000024921259,0.0115347365,0.000035544872,0.00002726034,0.27000773,0.53388417,0.18401328],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00016466474,0.00005194445,0.0012785069,0.00004063677,0.000022914379,8.269166e-7,0.0018300989,0.00009971337,0.00012870957,0.009437416,0.98674804,0.00019654293],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00042939605,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004622791,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.93308836,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000030374102,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005334746,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9991509},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3163484650","doi":"","title":"Do Juries Understand the Criminal Standard of Proof of Beyond Reasonable Doubt?","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Southern Queensland ePrints (University of Southern Queensland)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Queen (butterfly); Jury; Appeal; Argument (complex analysis); High Court; Reasonable doubt; Law; Context (archaeology); Meaning (existential); Jury trial; Phrase; Political science; Sociology; Philosophy; History; Epistemology","score_opus":0.02540723977455832,"score_gpt":0.2452614307588536,"score_spread":0.21985419098429526,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3163484650","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9687942,0.0003911893,0.0041083335,0.0016389657,0.00008051446,0.0003226064,0.0014332065,0.000043219552,0.02318776],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9904502,0.00022770389,0.0017417555,0.000011949985,0.00002902169,3.789708e-8,0.000014779958,0.000018083942,0.0075064898],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9972931,0.0004150508,0.00033483762,0.00047675445,0.0010846058,0.0003956167],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99656177,0.00040813224,0.0008290412,0.00064654124,0.0013978545,0.00015663916],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001158633,0.00024121262,0.00074117497,0.00022441443,0.00066618674,0.00002515097,0.0010157985,0.00026903578,0.0015061746],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002025461,0.00024604128,0.0003458141,0.00067762344,0.0023617505,0.00019867904,0.0003842879,0.00023255293,0.000051506708],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0048214546,0.0006203371,0.10471459,0.0009725711,0.00097061787,0.00020428382,0.84513277,0.0004444857,0.00047056164,0.024012519,0.0017791868,0.015856631],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0019797361,0.00013872064,0.003313714,0.00036684447,0.00040586598,0.0000051368415,0.9595368,0.000020780051,0.0007535885,0.015579485,0.017566402,0.00033291228],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0071806014,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.010777277,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.11440405,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00010472611,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00090313697,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99999917},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3175399491","doi":"10.29173/wclawr43","title":"Inconsistent Verdicts and the Possibility of Innocence","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Wrongful Conviction Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Psychology; Law; Art; Political science","score_opus":0.03290031932793363,"score_gpt":0.3507389077301941,"score_spread":0.3178385884022605,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3175399491","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.06544779,0.6266243,0.00041083677,0.1117631,0.0013422195,0.0022285853,0.000017000712,0.000154267,0.19201191],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9299146,0.06527244,0.00007385674,0.004197724,0.00005243078,0.000020282332,0.0000010378554,0.000004800852,0.00046283714],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99786764,0.0010600428,0.00036471392,0.00018894857,0.00038898658,0.00012968364],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99797165,0.00083685666,0.00021281568,0.00043418817,0.00050253206,0.00004193222],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0035058267,0.00007896068,0.00027449176,0.000008432036,0.00051860034,0.00005432778,0.00026930828,0.00003734658,0.0002831395],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0018481263,0.000042817628,0.000075771866,0.00054941885,0.0014113835,0.00013230085,0.00012423335,0.00012912555,0.000028536824],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000022611224,0.000026490063,0.00025204953,0.0005583738,0.000027211965,0.0000016369457,0.0013995693,0.0000010169496,0.000010915133,0.9555354,0.0009002225,0.041264463],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00043107747,0.000015474263,0.0032041727,0.0015102702,0.00016962577,0.000019644955,0.00080715725,0.000009429046,0.0001330321,0.02048432,0.97309995,0.00011587273],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000488597,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008760424,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9721997,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000031410647,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00023304827,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.52003014},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3186568943","doi":"","title":"When witness factors interact with crime type: Influences on jurors' perceptions and verdicts.","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"American journal of forensic psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Poison control; Human factors and ergonomics; Suicide prevention; Injury prevention; Perception; Occupational safety and health; Medical emergency; Psychology; Criminology; Social psychology; Forensic engineering; Engineering; Medicine; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.054885480986622014,"score_gpt":0.3821922716704929,"score_spread":0.3273067906838709,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3186568943","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9848304,0.00005176494,0.00039985336,0.00067685783,0.00055676536,0.00004902407,0.0000017165655,0.00001761744,0.013416006],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9955899,0.00010638171,0.003085065,0.001032928,0.00010051452,8.2578885e-7,3.1914354e-7,0.000012393495,0.00007163541],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.998781,0.00019496579,0.0002853694,0.00018677792,0.0003107787,0.00024107263],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986382,0.00024812887,0.0004649208,0.00015711,0.00032104427,0.0001705888],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00033541466,0.00012906255,0.0003089084,0.0002415816,0.00017581957,0.000030421652,0.0003295805,0.000047516813,0.00030769038],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002739397,0.000088605586,0.000047372934,0.00033074353,0.0022338165,0.00026843976,0.0000201419,0.00027446946,0.000019513129],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0022660282,0.00039456028,0.3680383,0.000007908724,0.00030482997,0.00016064178,0.14236888,0.0000060468064,0.00023591005,0.008772065,0.0075775995,0.46986723],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00037070137,0.003983391,0.95739657,0.000091111964,0.00005890309,0.00015935936,0.019274656,3.0298085e-7,0.000038797567,0.00816264,0.010276341,0.0001872256],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002212233,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00013275501,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.58935827,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000029323008,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00013944367,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.823059},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3198264010","doi":"10.22215/etd/2016-11576","title":"Aboriginal Canadians in the Courtroom: Effects of Defendant and Eyewitness Race on Juror Decision-Making in a Criminal Trial","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Eyewitness identification; Psychology; Verdict; Eyewitness testimony; Jury; Credibility; Race (biology); Criminology; White (mutation); Deception; Social psychology; Law; Political science; Sociology","score_opus":0.01309129713788482,"score_gpt":0.38761353318610015,"score_spread":0.37452223604821533,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3198264010","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97322804,0.0003488255,0.000092213486,0.0002528533,0.0012282687,0.0010499147,0.000011558846,0.00001525216,0.023773093],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9968295,0.00025008785,0.0002259707,0.0001410111,0.00018755806,0.00009100847,0.0000051984903,0.00002284597,0.0022468225],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99709487,0.00043455514,0.00052903563,0.00045683878,0.0010559394,0.00042877658],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99179363,0.007398317,0.0003210468,0.00024632076,0.00016029601,0.000080372694],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0017352897,0.00025381937,0.00049467967,0.0006072033,0.00023855457,0.000118244156,0.0006271117,0.00031237002,0.0000821199],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0026555208,0.00016234188,0.00007429986,0.0006263225,0.00014557854,0.00015492894,0.000008956992,0.00036238882,0.000009439858],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.036933947,0.00062872446,0.0011152651,0.0008492047,0.000049283564,0.00073566963,0.21393843,0.000016601352,0.00005958898,0.10702533,0.0025078517,0.6361401],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.09179548,0.0045289826,0.28817472,0.047195375,0.0009858548,0.00003482357,0.30737832,0.000055009154,0.0006200695,0.18652727,0.06788085,0.0048232474],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012002388,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.48474637,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.63131684,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00019606616,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016508953,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99457675},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3205305481","doi":"10.47611/jsrhs.v10i3.1595","title":"Understanding the Significance &amp; Complexity of the Brady Rule","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Student Research","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Centennial College","funders":"","keywords":"Culpability; Jury instructions; Psychology; Plea; Social psychology; Criminal justice; Criminal case; Law; Political science; Jury; Criminology","score_opus":0.7759855981946978,"score_gpt":0.5728357940114527,"score_spread":0.20314980418324513,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3205305481","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92340326,0.0012418847,0.0021632616,0.036128044,0.00077335536,0.00030816242,0.000004424478,0.000006899428,0.03597072],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99718726,0.00027917261,0.00021599191,0.00006564003,0.00021919778,0.000001208262,6.0203384e-8,0.0000048838383,0.0020266003],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99438316,0.0013228696,0.00035523268,0.00010236909,0.0035564972,0.0002798696],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99631804,0.0017365662,0.00025748578,0.000251552,0.0013624288,0.00007394785],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00787164,0.000050617342,0.00015941498,0.00008011565,0.0010699581,0.00022633915,0.0013424655,0.000038735456,0.00030709206],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022276149,0.000027151984,0.0001142785,0.0011576271,0.0012682949,0.00012804526,0.00033083357,0.0006320632,0.000010054723],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00021013137,0.0013625418,0.2146818,0.00013317139,0.00039920144,0.00012458084,0.11549973,0.0004663339,0.009732929,0.5721384,0.07921362,0.0060375356],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00067510124,0.00011111399,0.3811247,0.00037590708,0.000034838893,0.000031249696,0.17067045,0.000005376268,0.001631324,0.32869774,0.11649009,0.00015209458],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000077367746,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011976297,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.24344067,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00033685984,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011398062,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8229361},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3215796305","doi":"10.29173/mlj894","title":"Revisiting Representativeness in the Manitoban Criminal Jury","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Manitoba Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Representativeness heuristic; Jury; Political science; Criminology; Law; Psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.06620044348418722,"score_gpt":0.3729017499821353,"score_spread":0.30670130649794813,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3215796305","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.78089154,0.00027862916,0.0018514955,0.004536672,0.0009875989,0.00021483074,0.0000011691884,0.000056500478,0.21118158],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99548125,0.000060051818,0.00073180423,0.0011645065,0.0025009208,0.00000625422,5.354336e-7,0.000013893764,0.000040788127],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99646944,0.0015285283,0.0004023002,0.00021745573,0.00094637705,0.00043591784],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99825877,0.0009719447,0.00023521626,0.000236906,0.00020007462,0.00009708606],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006088769,0.0001268944,0.00018454637,0.00010280254,0.001818915,0.00080852973,0.0009648061,0.000070337184,0.00013033369],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011516453,0.00009277486,0.00008732212,0.00038029635,0.0002770741,0.00047105434,0.00006969869,0.0005543405,0.0000889136],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000055665092,0.000080333004,0.009072938,0.00004031254,0.000014807961,0.00032492078,0.017429523,0.00005923667,0.00003272967,0.37511763,0.001586951,0.59618497],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006387635,0.000081076454,0.064730465,0.0003418749,0.000057964466,0.00047160746,0.40936023,0.000032086515,0.0000890847,0.098947585,0.42484537,0.0004039122],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0049563455,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06640072,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.595781,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00011178382,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007462409,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994806},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W339343692","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2595436","title":"Forensic Oratory and the Jury Trial in Nineteenth-Century America","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Jury trial; History; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.02274339338361352,"score_gpt":0.3163099361167685,"score_spread":0.29356654273315497,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W339343692","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9234006,0.045713104,0.0012668532,0.011826395,0.0020581977,0.00082288083,0.0000015812474,0.00007845585,0.014831968],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98848706,0.009781275,0.000072457246,0.00031657165,0.00072438846,0.000008649586,3.8847088e-7,0.00001257782,0.00059663283],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9970114,0.00056497124,0.0002938735,0.00016699481,0.0006058,0.0013569306],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990993,0.00031517507,0.00019351309,0.00012162126,0.00013911877,0.00013123789],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0062109306,0.000108630935,0.00021397114,0.000117391675,0.00033050028,0.00014864004,0.00037394968,0.00007363304,0.000016866315],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0015181312,0.00007231708,0.00006033865,0.00046014317,0.00052264746,0.00025464353,0.00005345444,0.0012034089,0.000022147886],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.01474533,0.00011489391,0.0007725557,0.0000029096227,0.000077432516,0.0000135047985,0.011572041,0.000032621138,0.0000031607021,0.39851823,0.004258709,0.5698886],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.042012703,0.0005088333,0.00018933984,0.0000261508,0.000042092197,0.00008141122,0.04487078,0.00002807636,0.0000022771335,0.6642217,0.24776189,0.0002547123],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00021643486,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0032502564,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5696339,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005948206,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005246996,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9307946},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W341238104","doi":"","title":"Law's Treatment of Science: From Idealization to Understanding","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Dalhousie law journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Legitimacy; Scientific evidence; Political science; Consistency (knowledge bases); Law; Humanities; Sociology; Epistemology; Philosophy; Politics","score_opus":0.07659995695760385,"score_gpt":0.35944422057783837,"score_spread":0.2828442636202345,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W341238104","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6696873,0.00035169598,0.036282524,0.006054926,0.0023266184,0.0006860629,0.000024123103,0.0001328509,0.28445393],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9958982,0.0000756777,0.0032240828,0.00032163496,0.00030600515,0.0000039750407,9.699895e-7,0.000009932254,0.00015956465],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99826723,0.00007861015,0.00028375225,0.00017498039,0.00087482826,0.00032056903],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989847,0.00015676573,0.00017230771,0.00014205945,0.00027223537,0.0002719153],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005774425,0.000087481596,0.00016000893,0.00013068435,0.0017876833,0.00051144813,0.00036902976,0.00004981891,0.0007813246],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00014498344,0.00007113993,0.000049158938,0.0006433793,0.0007655151,0.0007012947,0.0000361097,0.000056715824,0.000086502565],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000126731875,0.000084880776,0.00063796586,0.0000019940542,0.000016926952,0.000006757457,0.024263676,0.00021429331,0.0014480326,0.9634809,0.0008334155,0.008998466],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010685783,0.000512276,0.004426338,0.00016709155,0.00005929119,0.000016052101,0.035886,0.00008454631,0.005370965,0.7570319,0.19493903,0.00043789664],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011270246,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009873988,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3262109,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00052817585,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00026981637,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99951184},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W35153713","doi":"10.1023/a:1016681404194","title":"Juries: How Do They Work? Do We Want Them?","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Criminal Law Forum","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Government of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Public international law; Political science; Law; International law","score_opus":0.053570759893810084,"score_gpt":0.327471026871978,"score_spread":0.2739002669781679,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W35153713","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.15527375,0.0018379277,0.0001151687,0.048958227,0.00079399033,0.00036279325,0.00002103966,0.00037593013,0.7922612],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97896993,0.00063578924,0.0007388593,0.00054749235,0.00029001196,0.000018744886,0.0000014160144,0.000026814509,0.018770954],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977668,0.00015464924,0.0002078902,0.00039159294,0.00076154503,0.0007175069],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99894,0.00027616136,0.00008273684,0.00038997646,0.00012543208,0.0001857084],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006658042,0.00019645569,0.00023186828,0.000041633026,0.0010854887,0.0006315863,0.0007511521,0.00015120723,0.0029396364],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00011501726,0.0001596571,0.00013137651,0.0002976122,0.000537602,0.0004333181,0.00007932135,0.00020593712,0.0012208355],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006264058,0.00005836787,0.00013988194,0.000018613722,0.000011469432,0.000022508026,0.015482678,0.000004176796,0.0000059894687,0.57417685,0.013544625,0.3964722],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011768776,0.00003800565,0.00008684434,0.000101164645,0.000032574986,0.000005995542,0.014660673,4.8003585e-7,0.00013940365,0.17927666,0.8053311,0.0002094212],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00021252931,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00072689325,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8236962,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006763337,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00015764567,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99955684},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4205317890","doi":"10.32920/17005219.v1","title":"The Impact Of Minority Status On Wrongful Convictions: A Case Study Analysis Of Donald Marshall JR. And Leighton Hay","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Conviction; Indigenous; Criminology; Economic Justice; Criminal justice; Racism; Sociology; Gender studies; Law; Political science; Ecology","score_opus":0.07084078710055726,"score_gpt":0.44043578384590304,"score_spread":0.3695949967453458,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4205317890","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97550935,0.0006760137,0.00002324069,0.0001467756,0.00018235043,0.00073600846,0.00027174334,0.00003309667,0.02242142],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99742895,0.0005620276,0.000098280434,0.000012520896,0.000031293068,0.000055806504,0.000011232641,0.000008116486,0.0017917829],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99657875,0.00086551136,0.00064250524,0.00054127345,0.0010649966,0.00030698866],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9957407,0.002330047,0.0006607717,0.00072569516,0.00040993706,0.0001328284],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0023265772,0.00023369535,0.00067147374,0.0005346858,0.0007221232,0.00015503106,0.0005241109,0.00014015524,0.0016561178],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007415303,0.00015488456,0.00040702207,0.0013576007,0.00038679052,0.00007561512,0.0007128179,0.00047948057,0.0000014526723],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000598293,0.0037339267,0.8523138,0.00014866845,0.012763041,0.00046341523,0.08039886,0.012292877,0.000008248649,0.009519744,0.003303988,0.024455143],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0011059259,0.0016727847,0.71068764,0.00005952275,0.0056885732,0.000013905798,0.2599196,0.0011141953,0.000016048907,0.006297996,0.0125367185,0.00088704826],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.18259291,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09697194,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.17952076,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00029134983,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000773359,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992565},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4206328364","doi":"10.32920/17005219","title":"The Impact Of Minority Status On Wrongful Convictions: A Case Study Analysis Of Donald Marshall JR. And Leighton Hay","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Conviction; Criminology; Indigenous; Criminal justice; Racism; Economic Justice; Sociology; Law; Gender studies; Political science","score_opus":0.07084078710055726,"score_gpt":0.44043578384590304,"score_spread":0.3695949967453458,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4206328364","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97550935,0.0006760137,0.00002324069,0.0001467756,0.00018235043,0.00073600846,0.00027174334,0.00003309667,0.02242142],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99742895,0.0005620276,0.000098280434,0.000012520896,0.000031293068,0.000055806504,0.000011232641,0.000008116486,0.0017917829],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99657875,0.00086551136,0.00064250524,0.00054127345,0.0010649966,0.00030698866],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9957407,0.002330047,0.0006607717,0.00072569516,0.00040993706,0.0001328284],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0023265772,0.00023369535,0.00067147374,0.0005346858,0.0007221232,0.00015503106,0.0005241109,0.00014015524,0.0016561178],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007415303,0.00015488456,0.00040702207,0.0013576007,0.00038679052,0.00007561512,0.0007128179,0.00047948057,0.0000014526723],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000598293,0.0037339267,0.8523138,0.00014866845,0.012763041,0.00046341523,0.08039886,0.012292877,0.000008248649,0.009519744,0.003303988,0.024455143],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0011059259,0.0016727847,0.71068764,0.00005952275,0.0056885732,0.000013905798,0.2599196,0.0011141953,0.000016048907,0.006297996,0.0125367185,0.00088704826],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.18259291,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09697194,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.17952076,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00029134983,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000773359,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992565},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4230107417","doi":"10.32920/ryerson.14648445.v1","title":"Modeling juror decisions: a comparison of perceptions of innocence and guilt","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Toronto Metropolitan University; The Scarborough Hospital; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Innocence; Inference; Culpability; Consistency (knowledge bases); Bayesian inference; Social psychology; Verdict; Relevance (law); Perception; Framing (construction); Variety (cybernetics); Bayesian probability; Cognitive psychology; Computer science; Artificial intelligence; Criminology","score_opus":0.16397919363937125,"score_gpt":0.46057776524400973,"score_spread":0.2965985716046385,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4230107417","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.91100603,0.001911299,0.078401074,0.0004968539,0.00027872284,0.00024427325,0.000025174488,0.000048652964,0.007587885],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9185443,0.0014536248,0.07971337,0.000030394263,0.00003656745,0.0000104749615,0.000008335383,0.000010514382,0.00019243873],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99762976,0.0001732751,0.00078516157,0.0004394351,0.00078580016,0.00018659465],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971378,0.0006554132,0.00028871134,0.0006763539,0.001149383,0.00009236492],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008237816,0.00015394285,0.0005822462,0.00021956392,0.00020508976,0.00010312352,0.00090013724,0.00030448483,0.00043456513],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0059743747,0.0001480198,0.00011154829,0.00045246142,0.00035835302,0.00013169028,0.0015616135,0.00034305663,0.0000036012982],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00012352795,0.0017503378,0.058529757,0.001216134,0.00029893324,0.000011351563,0.24373026,0.1506026,0.00208803,0.05695154,0.006176541,0.478521],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001031175,0.00021168255,0.02756384,0.008780483,0.0005400472,0.0000069060893,0.50391364,0.26241466,0.0011137344,0.1890554,0.0032333834,0.002135024],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010908946,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019887718,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.47638598,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003741347,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008469125,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7152316},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4231014250","doi":"10.1111/fcre.12371","title":"Issue Information","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"paratext","venue":"Family Court Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"University of Toronto; Arizona State University; Newcastle University; Emory University","keywords":"Citation; Computer science; World Wide Web; Information retrieval; Internet privacy","score_opus":0.04355394329619234,"score_gpt":0.38976656757069666,"score_spread":0.34621262427450433,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4231014250","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[8.8377726e-7,0.35413548,0.0002135064,0.0032944083,0.008204954,0.00086612726,0.00006112083,0.000047686728,0.63317585],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.000017464754,0.5888446,0.00016145423,0.011741127,0.00065088744,0.000042539974,0.00019401319,0.000017166325,0.39833078],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99719447,0.00029859698,0.0007007,0.00026945284,0.0011544998,0.0003822578],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99779683,0.00027833483,0.0006275075,0.0005567979,0.0006222847,0.00011822829],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016238277,0.00028456483,0.0008029798,0.00014394327,0.00024780628,0.0002459954,0.0009743304,0.00043241953,0.01772197],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010220632,0.00025242183,0.00020399748,0.0006364446,0.000098194425,0.00071863295,0.00011239088,0.0004749471,0.5399877],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[9.892461e-7,0.000005247446,5.18178e-7,0.0036757807,0.000010681681,3.4615147e-7,0.00024277269,0.0000023263146,8.158551e-8,0.00016918844,0.85587454,0.14001752],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005279491,0.000014304758,0.000017941491,0.012547185,0.000055898352,5.18984e-7,0.00014326569,6.8426374e-7,1.9875041e-7,0.00004565388,0.986823,0.00029855836],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002176691,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000034575256,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.52226573,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00017970917,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014059934,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999928},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4232811659","doi":"10.32920/ryerson.14644839","title":"Exploring the use of systematic and heuristic processing in the courtroom: the effect of evidence modality on jurors’ decision-making processes","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Systems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada); Bishop's University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Deliberation; Psychology; Jury; Social psychology; Task (project management); Law; Political science","score_opus":0.4930673255067495,"score_gpt":0.4445827699028026,"score_spread":0.04848455560394688,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4232811659","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98635674,0.0052123982,0.0036995916,0.0013155104,0.00033898113,0.002810145,0.0000056957433,0.00004547823,0.0002154465],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9975661,0.0011603747,0.0005627994,0.000107068874,0.00007004981,0.00048348418,5.157136e-7,0.00002399546,0.00002560494],"study_design_codex":"systematic_review","study_design_gemma":"systematic_review","domain_scores_codex":[0.9920612,0.0033678508,0.0012239555,0.0006614608,0.0023206826,0.00036482845],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9376975,0.05918993,0.0011828915,0.0011312269,0.0007563252,0.000042107706],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.011023125,0.00037512087,0.0009794259,0.00017879064,0.0006601818,0.0009784235,0.0019911355,0.00015319289,0.000010390717],"category_scores_gemma":[0.087927155,0.00014827978,0.00015098162,0.0014185063,0.000700685,0.0006923389,0.0007589989,0.00078492356,0.0000012618694],"study_design_candidate":"systematic_review","study_design_consensus":"systematic_review","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0010370949,0.0004914223,0.023221767,0.4293744,0.00026906386,0.0001169933,0.34065497,0.041625082,0.000048753718,0.0041416716,0.00023465698,0.15878412],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006196602,0.00063555926,0.05682081,0.82187694,0.0015618191,0.00004437043,0.09061702,0.0059768255,0.00086684595,0.019318387,0.00018226675,0.001479473],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00067740504,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0016735623,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.39250255,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009705485,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008900252,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.94349605},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4236447318","doi":"10.32920/ryerson.14644839.v1","title":"Exploring the use of systematic and heuristic processing in the courtroom: the effect of evidence modality on jurors’ decision-making processes","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Systems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada); Bishop's University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Deliberation; Psychology; Jury; Social psychology; Task (project management); Law; Political science","score_opus":0.4930673255067495,"score_gpt":0.4445827699028026,"score_spread":0.04848455560394688,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4236447318","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98635674,0.0052123982,0.0036995916,0.0013155104,0.00033898113,0.002810145,0.0000056957433,0.00004547823,0.0002154465],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9975661,0.0011603747,0.0005627994,0.000107068874,0.00007004981,0.00048348418,5.157136e-7,0.00002399546,0.00002560494],"study_design_codex":"systematic_review","study_design_gemma":"systematic_review","domain_scores_codex":[0.9920612,0.0033678508,0.0012239555,0.0006614608,0.0023206826,0.00036482845],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9376975,0.05918993,0.0011828915,0.0011312269,0.0007563252,0.000042107706],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.011023125,0.00037512087,0.0009794259,0.00017879064,0.0006601818,0.0009784235,0.0019911355,0.00015319289,0.000010390717],"category_scores_gemma":[0.087927155,0.00014827978,0.00015098162,0.0014185063,0.000700685,0.0006923389,0.0007589989,0.00078492356,0.0000012618694],"study_design_candidate":"systematic_review","study_design_consensus":"systematic_review","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0010370949,0.0004914223,0.023221767,0.4293744,0.00026906386,0.0001169933,0.34065497,0.041625082,0.000048753718,0.0041416716,0.00023465698,0.15878412],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006196602,0.00063555926,0.05682081,0.82187694,0.0015618191,0.00004437043,0.09061702,0.0059768255,0.00086684595,0.019318387,0.00018226675,0.001479473],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00067740504,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0016735623,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.39250255,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009705485,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008900252,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.94349605},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4237406470","doi":"10.5206/uwojls.v9i1.6836","title":"Runaway Jurors","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Western Journal of Legal Studies","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Political science; Law; Law and economics; Criminology; Psychology; Sociology","score_opus":0.06518602737449636,"score_gpt":0.42273003252261937,"score_spread":0.357544005148123,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4237406470","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.96227294,0.00549373,0.000056524823,0.0038239507,0.002182321,0.000084234714,9.037611e-7,0.0000222676,0.026063146],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98903674,0.00078081834,0.00025232334,0.00030726814,0.0004260154,5.8209906e-7,3.4318294e-8,0.000008946753,0.009187278],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99847484,0.00011120355,0.0003770682,0.000103577266,0.0007122832,0.00022105886],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99857074,0.00034683858,0.0003641628,0.000096644835,0.0005398672,0.000081726845],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00105775,0.00009406929,0.00031636606,0.00010856045,0.00020532262,0.00010717562,0.00037968988,0.000039291837,0.000091824404],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0006008712,0.0000695103,0.00010845871,0.00021514324,0.00016978421,0.00056287483,0.000072753115,0.0001856495,0.00016250367],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00043733715,0.00035506857,0.6580106,0.00022355567,0.0013155941,0.0006050789,0.117877126,0.00028799675,0.000566451,0.052966136,0.04024162,0.12711342],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00035217704,0.00020043267,0.021486614,0.00016761533,0.00003212901,0.000029900253,0.012314076,2.095493e-7,0.00009115219,0.0016152958,0.9635801,0.00013032487],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000021951919,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00018402698,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9233385,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000076865705,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00017805498,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.28345478},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4237698400","doi":"10.22215/etd/2014-10529","title":"The Role of Defendant Race and Racially Charged Media in the Canadian Courtroom","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Race (biology); Salience (neuroscience); Verdict; Attribution; Psychology; White (mutation); Salient; Social psychology; Criminology; Racial bias; Political science; Law; Sociology; Gender studies","score_opus":0.0125905811821022,"score_gpt":0.3103272804742153,"score_spread":0.2977366992921131,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4237698400","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.39914787,0.005676784,0.000005156536,0.005461888,0.0012768407,0.0009108237,0.00002849838,0.00003495473,0.5874572],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9954331,0.0005803912,0.000040425235,0.00015044841,0.00012489881,0.000019491126,0.000026190713,0.000011278463,0.0036138075],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982891,0.00029627237,0.00026533887,0.00018009086,0.0006831525,0.00028603745],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99791664,0.0013808617,0.00019902964,0.00018689167,0.00022319799,0.000093360664],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002650355,0.00011708175,0.00020092144,0.00012261499,0.0008030297,0.00018782757,0.0006602442,0.00021467626,0.00008967725],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0024152624,0.00006687719,0.00003873075,0.000282455,0.00015819645,0.00005969161,0.000009322715,0.0002475595,0.00001577689],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000091562724,0.000030690335,0.0042946753,0.000041896314,0.00003330684,0.0000069377484,0.25649416,0.0000021261044,0.0000624267,0.46693766,0.0063300994,0.26567447],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001516534,0.000017866842,0.04849242,0.00008292418,0.000031398456,6.220205e-7,0.10385139,0.000011918269,0.00013562854,0.040326823,0.8066741,0.00022322641],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.25752154,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9987369,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.80034405,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000058106667,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0017568701,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7474227},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4239987340","doi":"10.1017/9781139600163.012","title":"Jury Tax Table1","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Computer science; Information retrieval; Business; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.03317111189285499,"score_gpt":0.3743134708216827,"score_spread":0.3411423589288277,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4239987340","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0000013537867,0.00035270234,0.00048981805,0.0003106111,0.0012340326,0.0001368343,0.000009419567,0.00053447566,0.9969308],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.000059500715,0.00025626377,0.0035706568,0.00034954655,0.001983451,0.0000066726693,0.000002452036,0.00019252874,0.9935789],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9987557,0.000059780985,0.000112817506,0.00027843405,0.0005188039,0.00027448413],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993756,0.00007425995,0.00011919654,0.00027192224,0.000068450325,0.00009061324],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00034539736,0.00013065446,0.00017973308,0.00016403529,0.00015157991,0.000108719854,0.00053227285,0.00035701325,0.23460726],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003491164,0.00011066171,0.00004606667,0.00030449132,0.00030214622,0.000047261474,0.00006791566,0.00007617517,0.021680482],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[7.6037696e-7,0.000008133396,0.000013996053,0.000007620233,0.00000788827,0.0000018741861,0.000121517885,5.992601e-9,2.1710466e-7,0.014742729,0.9685549,0.01654034],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003434242,0.00000765558,0.0000077249815,0.000060512117,0.000007835485,1.9702998e-7,0.00017675103,1.11378384e-7,0.0000028318593,0.0022066096,0.99733686,0.00015859076],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015626109,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009919081,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.21292679,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000032985285,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003260828,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9790813},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4243484736","doi":"10.32920/ryerson.14648445","title":"Modeling juror decisions: a comparison of perceptions of innocence and guilt","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Toronto Metropolitan University; The Scarborough Hospital; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Psychology; Inference; Culpability; Consistency (knowledge bases); Bayesian inference; Social psychology; Perception; Framing (construction); Relevance (law); Verdict; Variety (cybernetics); Bayesian probability; Cognitive psychology; Computer science; Artificial intelligence; Criminology","score_opus":0.16397919363937125,"score_gpt":0.46057776524400973,"score_spread":0.2965985716046385,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4243484736","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.91100603,0.001911299,0.078401074,0.0004968539,0.00027872284,0.00024427325,0.000025174488,0.000048652964,0.007587885],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9185443,0.0014536248,0.07971337,0.000030394263,0.00003656745,0.0000104749615,0.000008335383,0.000010514382,0.00019243873],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99762976,0.0001732751,0.00078516157,0.0004394351,0.00078580016,0.00018659465],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971378,0.0006554132,0.00028871134,0.0006763539,0.001149383,0.00009236492],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008237816,0.00015394285,0.0005822462,0.00021956392,0.00020508976,0.00010312352,0.00090013724,0.00030448483,0.00043456513],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0059743747,0.0001480198,0.00011154829,0.00045246142,0.00035835302,0.00013169028,0.0015616135,0.00034305663,0.0000036012982],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00012352795,0.0017503378,0.058529757,0.001216134,0.00029893324,0.000011351563,0.24373026,0.1506026,0.00208803,0.05695154,0.006176541,0.478521],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001031175,0.00021168255,0.02756384,0.008780483,0.0005400472,0.0000069060893,0.50391364,0.26241466,0.0011137344,0.1890554,0.0032333834,0.002135024],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010908946,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019887718,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.47638598,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003741347,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008469125,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7152316},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4244006404","doi":"10.22215/etd/2009-08690","title":"The influence of type of crime, age of witness, and eyewitness identification decisions on juror's verdicts and perceptions of reliability","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Canadian Heritage; Library and Archives Canada","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Eyewitness identification; Psychology; Eyewitness testimony; Perception; Identification (biology); Reliability (semiconductor); Social psychology; Criminology; Political science; Law; Computer science; Power (physics)","score_opus":0.02903521149440252,"score_gpt":0.38824223208444136,"score_spread":0.35920702059003884,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4244006404","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9939737,0.00030261322,0.000046948087,0.000052812597,0.00013535531,0.00032007357,0.000022948863,0.000011629923,0.0051339194],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99640185,0.0019499336,0.00023946211,0.000006582512,0.000010516698,0.0000054595826,0.000031294476,0.000008827111,0.0013460701],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978958,0.00016876055,0.0007802622,0.00028911285,0.0007457675,0.00012030181],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99561346,0.001541151,0.00077707105,0.000436412,0.0015818198,0.000050086797],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011581734,0.00013531787,0.00038327932,0.00016723172,0.00026610892,0.000029409024,0.0003803533,0.00021627008,0.000020476138],"category_scores_gemma":[0.005396217,0.000101459445,0.000057586156,0.0006472622,0.00091638207,0.00017675513,0.000031508393,0.00013353059,0.0000012715594],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0029671574,0.0020885535,0.032884732,0.0027499301,0.00024020267,0.0000035589037,0.0766665,0.0013505816,0.09707129,0.42257428,0.0017681052,0.3596351],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000106647654,0.00010744425,0.9649555,0.00038813785,0.00007247877,1.6062809e-7,0.005775873,0.0000037466698,0.0016893548,0.026567569,0.00023930326,0.00009375552],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00054020935,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001513687,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9320708,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000020831852,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00034734225,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6460166},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4244300333","doi":"10.22215/etd/2007-06438","title":"The relationship between beliefs, strength of evidence, statistical presentation, and expert testimony on jury decision-making in DNA cases","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University; Canadian Heritage","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Presentation (obstetrics); Psychology; Circumstantial evidence; Law; Philosophy; Political science; Medicine","score_opus":0.1828203145463324,"score_gpt":0.5076472443904738,"score_spread":0.3248269298441414,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4244300333","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9656311,0.005312164,0.002432815,0.00066582946,0.0010218885,0.0014192619,0.00009208345,0.00013335848,0.023291456],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.991232,0.0007937191,0.005274844,0.00003958716,0.00019990448,0.000029795303,0.00005550065,0.000028258117,0.0023464311],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9963845,0.00034668553,0.00093135954,0.0004878102,0.0014860835,0.00036355885],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8836221,0.1152421,0.000398623,0.0002682222,0.00036667552,0.000102298254],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021237729,0.00024473984,0.00035941583,0.00046367798,0.00079575664,0.00023019536,0.0004586142,0.000364957,0.000098331315],"category_scores_gemma":[0.074996054,0.00016918103,0.000050036415,0.00090362167,0.00033159135,0.00032073588,0.000041668452,0.00042111654,0.000014085973],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00036519635,0.00009040944,0.15937786,0.00008965388,0.00002310625,0.00003505049,0.010482861,0.0000148369,0.0000017441154,0.057876967,0.009790753,0.76185155],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014036529,0.00010387952,0.94064295,0.002343842,0.000030470374,0.000001064529,0.011390758,0.0000078107005,0.000027007036,0.042173658,0.0028807933,0.00025739518],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008922111,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.025450025,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7812651,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012194335,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000633331,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.992333},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4245631203","doi":"10.4324/9780203759899-14","title":"Effects of Criminal Motivation, Ability and Opportunity on Mock Jurors' Verdicts","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Social psychology; Criminology","score_opus":0.059071584338983,"score_gpt":0.3148665430609393,"score_spread":0.2557949587219563,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4245631203","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.018395275,0.0001185854,0.00007795147,0.00030622465,0.00026001246,0.0005810333,0.000008572431,0.00008163284,0.9801707],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.44102323,0.00029393143,0.00030878824,0.00035982512,0.00016428686,0.000011582106,0.0000063265875,0.000031886135,0.5578001],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99817836,0.00008286736,0.00035469592,0.000402776,0.0007869266,0.00019437553],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9967601,0.0019469886,0.0003002532,0.00028876893,0.00046878416,0.00023513752],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00055179093,0.0002339852,0.00038612017,0.00014882596,0.00023024125,0.000056415643,0.0002819141,0.00036524664,0.0022859138],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0030867304,0.0002032888,0.00007978132,0.00004909228,0.0005245967,0.00017125896,0.00010012814,0.00025945646,0.00010761828],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000035624056,0.00008756939,0.000104572464,0.000609211,0.000042468575,0.000008287854,0.0018773265,0.0000010598657,0.000025999723,0.8992433,0.016872784,0.08109182],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00054946187,0.0005020276,0.033410795,0.0008055723,0.00024673017,0.0000017247703,0.00037361585,0.000004701386,0.0005850368,0.60418284,0.35850948,0.0008280128],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002555218,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00006965417,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.42262796,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007305892,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00037770683,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9986261},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4248613833","doi":"10.1353/mdr.2004.0055","title":"Tom Stoppard: In the Russian Court","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Modern Drama","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"History","score_opus":0.036757947845068126,"score_gpt":0.3429541583394147,"score_spread":0.3061962104943466,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4248613833","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.69663876,0.00044166658,0.009632896,0.06598739,0.0003866101,0.00039391115,0.0000044672734,0.00016090432,0.22635336],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99719244,0.000022133801,0.0006129604,0.001166761,0.00013621809,0.000012968576,6.9756015e-7,0.000008265668,0.00084754004],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99873704,0.00010238413,0.00013902487,0.00018305256,0.0005580846,0.0002804332],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995365,0.00011953671,0.000041997857,0.00023051376,0.000022997041,0.000048451555],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007847371,0.00007543317,0.000097303375,0.000058659865,0.00030158926,0.00019313046,0.0005786827,0.00007625653,0.00006242629],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00018807435,0.000054591612,0.000037074977,0.00032176613,0.00013804011,0.0001717527,0.000033003555,0.00015367004,0.0001745327],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000028919198,0.00026802588,0.0029545869,0.000010523699,0.0000092747505,0.00010943933,0.20985898,0.0026912114,0.000023607508,0.67586493,0.0021535256,0.10602694],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005689236,0.00003325115,0.022097025,0.00004739955,0.000007763079,0.000004548341,0.006203961,0.000112851674,0.000037873044,0.74395794,0.22670513,0.00022335662],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007158146,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0030536528,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.30055365,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000097190445,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00023019468,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23196113},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4251093694","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190874810.001.0001","title":"Familiarity and Conviction in the Criminal Justice System","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Conviction; Criminal justice; Criminology; Economic Justice; Political science; Psychology; Law","score_opus":0.05568535460850339,"score_gpt":0.34873976766184683,"score_spread":0.29305441305334345,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4251093694","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00077930506,0.00039023595,0.00016645629,0.00019034634,0.000761796,0.0003561195,0.0000053834196,0.000057805948,0.9972926],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.07787591,0.00029214914,0.00010552937,0.0004179087,0.0004463012,0.000010180034,0.0000051293364,0.000012621197,0.92083424],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9985693,0.00020682556,0.00020124111,0.00025986962,0.00059379917,0.00016894653],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99860245,0.0009115601,0.000111190915,0.00019489083,0.00014827511,0.000031635016],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014878643,0.000119951,0.00019520828,0.00008707314,0.0002519595,0.00016428817,0.0003590737,0.00029699464,0.00005324116],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003079594,0.00008327218,0.000027472539,0.00013671858,0.00016484721,0.00011401933,0.00004709135,0.00031663757,0.00018874828],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000015025844,0.0000141102655,0.000120318655,0.0013289108,0.0000069715584,0.000019314244,0.015572301,0.0000021733501,2.577371e-7,0.92013836,0.05807301,0.0047092335],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00018039248,0.000042353382,0.001080899,0.0004159988,0.00038512127,0.000015495705,0.086645365,0.000075942604,3.67246e-7,0.0040076836,0.9068807,0.0002697043],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00064381683,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0026774302,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.91613066,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00022641144,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006062649,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3395741},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4251665223","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/6dsfb","title":"The CSI Effect","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Perception; Face (sociological concept); Political science; Psychology; Social psychology; Law; Law and economics; Sociology; Social science","score_opus":0.05744685969893963,"score_gpt":0.44756161433797925,"score_spread":0.3901147546390396,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4251665223","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.006812599,0.0011498763,0.00029557335,0.0073984736,0.004029916,0.00043336325,0.0000024317567,0.00021504475,0.9796627],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.85634726,0.0009905132,0.00030339643,0.00012603813,0.0009156691,0.000059065278,0.0000013310613,0.000016437032,0.14124028],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99839735,0.00028026314,0.00013989113,0.0002866771,0.00062430237,0.00027149168],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971191,0.0015842756,0.00020305687,0.0008784356,0.00014465237,0.000070422764],"candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002943348,0.00012633996,0.00017242049,0.000026716998,0.002600999,0.0015887452,0.0021376899,0.000251412,0.00019098069],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0052082664,0.0000709315,0.000118642616,0.00003727184,0.0004642573,0.00006521455,0.00088682986,0.0004020413,0.0004839324],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000017492104,0.000009923464,0.00078134413,0.000039645296,0.00003848255,0.000007725044,0.0018574675,0.000011805349,0.000001231321,0.08280276,0.112191066,0.8022411],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000037710673,0.000008769603,0.0009583958,0.000049810107,0.0000123045365,1.5922994e-7,0.000118796605,0.0000050747676,0.00003065517,0.081299,0.91736174,0.00011757564],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000897448,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0033215645,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8495347,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005443917,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00048302638,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994477},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4252726277","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3643903","title":"The Test of Truth: An Experimental Investigation of the Norm of Assertion","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Assertion; Norm (philosophy); Test (biology); Epistemology; Philosophy; Computer science; Geology","score_opus":0.027028833025442057,"score_gpt":0.33572065376245175,"score_spread":0.3086918207370097,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4252726277","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9968082,0.0017139451,0.00007400114,0.00031031092,0.000262168,0.000070504844,8.0871774e-7,0.000004605195,0.00075545744],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9993605,0.0002989264,0.00005096207,0.000009921518,0.00014796645,0.000001452617,1.9213212e-7,0.000005710669,0.00012437186],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","domain_scores_codex":[0.99831754,0.00021604236,0.00029710683,0.00005386626,0.00052760297,0.00058783416],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987551,0.00041385653,0.00048032607,0.00012939055,0.00017477717,0.000046561552],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003458546,0.000054120694,0.000091771115,0.000036151538,0.00037022468,0.000018313343,0.00041556775,0.000046716905,0.0000122406],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010446025,0.00003163061,0.000063148145,0.00028318985,0.00031133398,0.00036822396,0.000025153535,0.00032677426,0.0000010562057],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000079113284,0.00032491167,0.18150261,0.000010300358,0.00005879789,4.593796e-8,0.020512827,0.000017184477,0.116316155,0.6532267,0.00006840241,0.027882958],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005865216,0.00074472494,0.16152905,0.00008957364,0.00006329242,0.000028653672,0.07925635,0.000023898327,0.3968186,0.35962668,0.0010452123,0.00018743094],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000117216514,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00090436405,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.29360002,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00022320934,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014340888,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.28475064},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4254101099","doi":"10.22215/etd/2009-09363","title":"Juror judgments across description inconsistencies and multiple identifications","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Canadian Heritage; Library and Archives Canada","funders":"","keywords":"Computer science; Information retrieval; Psychology; Humanities; Philosophy","score_opus":0.06900778351564711,"score_gpt":0.3992436453903021,"score_spread":0.330235861874655,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4254101099","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.90607107,0.0010222859,0.00017653726,0.0005049746,0.0015605482,0.0006197741,0.0000425942,0.00030673144,0.08969548],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8514813,0.00047804168,0.0011058848,0.00013709071,0.000097508055,0.000022592,0.00022446299,0.000017723727,0.14643538],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982078,0.0000921571,0.00036412297,0.0004310396,0.0005969468,0.00030789708],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987671,0.00020894944,0.0002508926,0.0002269027,0.0004335337,0.00011263612],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00058185874,0.0001838916,0.0002216142,0.00013446767,0.0013466584,0.0006875941,0.00030765636,0.00031650715,0.00012289434],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013774318,0.00018615455,0.000066085275,0.00036521073,0.00015350324,0.0005151149,0.000023393526,0.00017912767,0.00012813677],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00014747746,0.00044291007,0.0064688995,0.00029381362,0.00012834679,0.000013181685,0.12089666,0.000007369137,0.0029783845,0.022761906,0.039105814,0.80675524],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005532676,0.00005363064,0.5967027,0.000360097,0.00014643204,0.0000026181715,0.16786213,0.000022532357,0.0010758834,0.022826418,0.20940912,0.0009851665],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007367855,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06576006,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8057701,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000091043185,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002482042,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99995345},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4282984404","doi":"10.5070/cj86157755","title":"A Bandage on A Broken System: Moving Beyond Peremptory Challenges To Increase Indigenous Juror Representation In Canada","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"UCLA Criminal Justice Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Guelph; Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Indigenous; Dismissal; Acquittal; Law; Jury selection; White (mutation); Political science; Government (linguistics); Sociology; Criminology","score_opus":0.0685666316420547,"score_gpt":0.35384835536657583,"score_spread":0.2852817237245211,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4282984404","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.55727243,0.22656424,0.000040411644,0.007626845,0.0021749563,0.004570343,0.0001532028,0.00025917566,0.20133838],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9792575,0.011237611,0.00024918385,0.008392952,0.00017915528,0.00031581003,0.000010237458,0.00003266613,0.000324887],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9958639,0.0011869157,0.00053249055,0.0005563742,0.0013764092,0.0004839156],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998092,0.0008644024,0.00022674276,0.000414537,0.00014847967,0.00025385624],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020463225,0.00019833253,0.000469873,0.00012539185,0.0009961809,0.000060224338,0.0006750962,0.000038862294,0.00027464514],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013421485,0.00020720759,0.00006732978,0.00064315624,0.00005094795,0.00017071728,0.00020747518,0.0003526326,0.000047820457],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00047243608,0.0005221378,0.00020106103,0.06857828,0.000077435274,0.0033630854,0.1310671,0.0011913293,0.000043950688,0.29478267,0.016910337,0.4827902],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004748325,0.00031635,0.0020034902,0.0077110715,0.0013693613,0.0000917718,0.20474222,0.000024466399,0.000013237873,0.00022417658,0.78215015,0.00087886205],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8270956,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9165507,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.76523983,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0022074673,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002247193,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.844968},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4290192103","doi":"","title":"THE EXCLUSION OF ILEGALLY ADMINISTERED EVIDENCE","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology","score_opus":0.6411889549118821,"score_gpt":0.6663047512512809,"score_spread":0.025115796339398755,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4290192103","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.83464885,0.08291572,0.00074119994,0.0037660748,0.0032660333,0.0011733407,0.000024862158,0.00009385356,0.07337004],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9820238,0.014825974,0.00034833845,0.00021568479,0.00025379332,0.000019016139,7.5417336e-7,0.00002820599,0.002284428],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99486625,0.000898096,0.0010570684,0.00038116804,0.0023513506,0.0004460863],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9932806,0.002580093,0.0014645322,0.0006400461,0.0016121396,0.00042258258],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","scholarly_communication","open_science","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008369081,0.00022321197,0.0005780418,0.00036845964,0.0008788311,0.002011392,0.006604411,0.00013223711,0.002357144],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009752355,0.00016206679,0.00016825266,0.0015990016,0.00065906555,0.0035260038,0.001661387,0.00031907164,0.000035645782],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0017442898,0.00052331184,0.23945732,0.00016133864,0.00021155491,0.00007939696,0.012080251,0.00015605136,0.016397743,0.004561724,0.3934907,0.3311363],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00083729986,0.000072800496,0.2575819,0.002618131,0.0001313406,0.000013658058,0.0046285074,0.000044578454,0.011150237,0.082129665,0.640008,0.00078388874],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015530172,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009329856,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.33035243,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001476707,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0015042699,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9990246},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4312166857","doi":"10.5539/jpl.v16n1p64","title":"The Evolution and Development Trend of the American Federal Rules of Evidence – Inspiration for China&amp;#39;s Evidence Legislation","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Politics and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Federal Rules of Evidence; Legislation; Promulgation; Empirical evidence; Discretion; Law; Political science; China; Scope (computer science); Evidence-based practice; Rules of evidence; Law and economics; Economics; Medicine","score_opus":0.12223077778078081,"score_gpt":0.38980996055041967,"score_spread":0.2675791827696389,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4312166857","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9932263,0.0017019816,0.0018640666,0.0028106796,0.00014491024,0.000098871955,0.0000052984547,0.0000016746812,0.00014621999],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9984036,0.00020455019,0.001108779,0.00006634438,0.000060781847,0.0000025609504,1.5993301e-7,0.0000025339125,0.00015066224],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99893844,0.00016119168,0.00031064264,0.00005486836,0.00043582226,0.00009902842],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99841064,0.0006571935,0.00066387234,0.00005686661,0.00017979396,0.000031607084],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013824836,0.000041296873,0.00010710284,0.000036049736,0.0010238892,0.00006009473,0.00015390174,0.0000117509935,0.0000027232663],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007862582,0.000023844468,0.00003168484,0.00010444445,0.0003607553,0.00021419508,0.000053451407,0.000073069416,3.2600436e-8],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00016110332,0.00006389113,0.018398305,0.00006972127,0.000040646948,3.340065e-7,0.02158771,0.0004111001,0.0011486544,0.9037712,0.00037979844,0.05396754],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004874279,0.0008078898,0.6527738,0.00060047023,0.00008278508,0.000026015743,0.012230059,0.00029043024,0.00066967116,0.11307432,0.21874338,0.0002137252],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006364544,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0014123075,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.79069686,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009993962,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003692806,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7875031},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4323350868","doi":"10.32920/22229530","title":"Revisiting Jury Instructions on Racial Prejudice Towards Indigenous Peoples in Criminal Jury Trials","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Supreme court; Conviction; Indigenous; Criminology; Law; Psychology; Jury selection; Political science; Criminal justice; Jury instructions; Prejudice (legal term); Jurisprudence; Jury trial; Hung jury","score_opus":0.21822653472405637,"score_gpt":0.4596668219355476,"score_spread":0.24144028721149122,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4323350868","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.90934706,0.00068936986,0.00083998515,0.0034748898,0.008861444,0.0023736407,0.00020490655,0.0012624182,0.07294627],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9780506,0.003032897,0.0055829547,0.00042812576,0.0058278637,0.0003422527,0.000069960144,0.00011641289,0.0065489216],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9928911,0.0017004058,0.0017082536,0.0011724634,0.0016955215,0.0008322571],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99427307,0.003504705,0.00097393355,0.0006346668,0.0004022731,0.00021136459],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010069559,0.00046884047,0.001330535,0.0011209318,0.0010304305,0.00071796007,0.0012954657,0.00088658143,0.0006224131],"category_scores_gemma":[0.028203545,0.00045907227,0.00041857676,0.0012393548,0.0002737629,0.0002640343,0.0009054165,0.0014293441,0.00036682756],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00026473455,0.00018293223,0.0008767644,0.00074961665,0.000116021285,0.000110834815,0.13979658,0.0008815089,0.000014876754,0.018006183,0.003160933,0.83583903],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004027221,0.00057660893,0.2848547,0.013986711,0.0016439608,0.00003828301,0.27756524,0.00009747215,0.0007731744,0.23590223,0.1732121,0.007322257],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0060046767,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01593189,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8285167,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006162767,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005231433,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997861},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4323350884","doi":"10.32920/22229530.v1","title":"Revisiting Jury Instructions on Racial Prejudice Towards Indigenous Peoples in Criminal Jury Trials","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Supreme court; Conviction; Indigenous; Criminology; Law; Psychology; Political science; Criminal justice; Prejudice (legal term); Jury selection; Jury instructions; Jurisprudence; Jury trial; Hung jury","score_opus":0.21822653472405637,"score_gpt":0.4596668219355476,"score_spread":0.24144028721149122,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4323350884","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.90934706,0.00068936986,0.00083998515,0.0034748898,0.008861444,0.0023736407,0.00020490655,0.0012624182,0.07294627],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9780506,0.003032897,0.0055829547,0.00042812576,0.0058278637,0.0003422527,0.000069960144,0.00011641289,0.0065489216],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9928911,0.0017004058,0.0017082536,0.0011724634,0.0016955215,0.0008322571],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99427307,0.003504705,0.00097393355,0.0006346668,0.0004022731,0.00021136459],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010069559,0.00046884047,0.001330535,0.0011209318,0.0010304305,0.00071796007,0.0012954657,0.00088658143,0.0006224131],"category_scores_gemma":[0.028203545,0.00045907227,0.00041857676,0.0012393548,0.0002737629,0.0002640343,0.0009054165,0.0014293441,0.00036682756],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00026473455,0.00018293223,0.0008767644,0.00074961665,0.000116021285,0.000110834815,0.13979658,0.0008815089,0.000014876754,0.018006183,0.003160933,0.83583903],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004027221,0.00057660893,0.2848547,0.013986711,0.0016439608,0.00003828301,0.27756524,0.00009747215,0.0007731744,0.23590223,0.1732121,0.007322257],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0060046767,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01593189,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8285167,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006162767,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005231433,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997861},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4361263735","doi":"10.1093/jrssig/qmad026","title":"Racial bias in jury selection","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Significance","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Waterloo","funders":"Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich","keywords":"Jury; Jury selection; Selection (genetic algorithm); Economic Justice; Criminology; Selection bias; Law; Criminal justice; Political science; Psychology; Computer science; Medicine; Artificial intelligence","score_opus":0.11958805630046447,"score_gpt":0.40669710172490775,"score_spread":0.28710904542444327,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4361263735","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.93364066,0.000085636704,0.0003189793,0.0024063936,0.0010527589,0.0003288884,0.0000045580646,0.00063317077,0.061528955],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9925329,0.000088381836,0.00016400267,0.00010375556,0.00027129974,0.000030434432,0.0000012493172,0.000008742926,0.0067992127],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9988341,0.00013827099,0.0001512333,0.0002182399,0.00037033702,0.0002878659],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994584,0.00029366842,0.00005321352,0.000079381156,0.000068171525,0.000047197245],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010798849,0.000059037306,0.000091945294,0.00017633209,0.00022608839,0.00006190944,0.00019705888,0.00006953263,0.00018875721],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011443438,0.00006286376,0.000025076693,0.002369413,0.000100521924,0.00017161206,0.000019765206,0.000113714144,0.000807379],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013063895,0.00013288621,0.052665617,0.00005081353,0.000012594551,0.00006726355,0.04156463,0.0012730203,0.004503378,0.07603859,0.07579482,0.7477657],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000314176,0.00005162167,0.1509821,0.000053014144,0.0000046041882,4.5991828e-7,0.0035304127,0.00018292207,0.0015147997,0.030457117,0.81258047,0.00032828917],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00033549103,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0039994414,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7474375,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008971552,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002904361,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999706},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4362512660","doi":"10.22215/etd/2023-15352","title":"Participation during Deliberation as a Function of Individual Juror Traits: An Examination of the First Hypothesis of The Story Sampling Model from Devine (2012)’s Multi-Level Theory of Jury Decision Making","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Deliberation; Psychology; Function (biology); Sampling (signal processing); Social psychology; Epistemology; Law; Political science; Computer science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.1649920360323933,"score_gpt":0.3738991262652589,"score_spread":0.2089070902328656,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4362512660","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99052733,0.0001742809,0.007541232,0.000025087054,0.0005477868,0.00070040976,0.00016492496,0.000046478694,0.0002724832],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99440724,0.00005849807,0.004460653,0.00002263238,0.000059321683,0.000041578667,0.000068617686,0.000056403656,0.00082505814],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99571484,0.0006660568,0.0011945718,0.0004476359,0.0017436061,0.00023325851],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9940864,0.0022962487,0.0020610206,0.0004670717,0.0010484875,0.000040809446],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0027038732,0.0002708705,0.00048406233,0.0003871978,0.000571356,0.00004429938,0.0008417252,0.00045082037,0.00009540673],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0041194465,0.000199632,0.00023113843,0.0009188256,0.00020352851,0.0006206999,0.0001010743,0.00027513356,0.0000023949433],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003428184,0.00018556765,0.000028332126,0.00020626381,0.00007886947,6.451025e-8,0.019881077,0.0057374896,0.0030151722,0.0013063973,0.000018269246,0.96919966],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003721084,0.000051386083,0.9784628,0.0012166078,0.00035109636,7.807214e-8,0.009382521,0.00026705491,0.0043379604,0.0053663636,0.000009331059,0.00018265027],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000011799815,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004738203,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9784345,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012248065,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00059770804,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.81407565},"labels":[{"model":"gemma","categories":[],"domain":null,"study_design":"observational","genre":"empirical","about_ca_system":false,"about_ca_topic":false,"confidence":"low"},{"model":"gpt","categories":[],"domain":null,"study_design":"design_other","genre":"empirical","about_ca_system":false,"about_ca_topic":false,"confidence":"low"}],"label_agreement":"split"},{"id":"W4378610418","doi":"10.1017/epi.2023.27","title":"Algorithmic Decision-making, Statistical Evidence and the Rule of Law","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Episteme","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Intuition; Epistemology; Secrecy; TRACE (psycholinguistics); Implementation; Computer science; Sociology; Law; Political science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.05429361003466799,"score_gpt":0.4085619098255032,"score_spread":0.35426829979083524,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4378610418","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5222583,0.015765743,0.11706617,0.05947224,0.006204482,0.004339798,0.00028747212,0.0017438524,0.27286196],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99412656,0.0002518838,0.0044689677,0.00021408146,0.00009604906,0.000013786005,4.895047e-7,0.000008427578,0.0008197745],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.998412,0.00024115345,0.0002755543,0.00020226515,0.0006525817,0.00021642244],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9898708,0.00963668,0.00010340856,0.0002113541,0.00012358761,0.000054185268],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0026140243,0.00007129231,0.00018494691,0.000051986088,0.00040830643,0.00009278975,0.0003683593,0.000051472165,0.00020311333],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0062985457,0.000048459362,0.000035320045,0.0004308521,0.0013364474,0.0001562303,0.00014099533,0.0000887811,0.00018620866],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000055954923,0.000010621507,0.00026220919,0.000029404138,0.000008584526,0.000014454696,0.0055564893,0.000009275284,0.000006601644,0.9079763,0.0040370286,0.082033075],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005632022,0.00004492934,0.019302921,0.00071237265,0.000033348515,0.000005270258,0.001903682,0.00079890015,0.000019699535,0.8364749,0.13993366,0.00020713678],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00039397922,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00034168753,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.47186825,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002239839,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000104458195,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.75404024},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4384697900","doi":"10.22215/etd/2023-15486","title":"Expressions of Colour-Blind Racism Within All-White and Mixed-Race Jury Deliberations","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Government of Canada","keywords":"Racism; Jury; White (mutation); Indigenous; Race (biology); Psychometrics of racism; Ideology; Narrative; Criminology; Gender studies; Multiculturalism; Sociology; Ignorance; Political science; Law; Politics; Art","score_opus":0.06316245984785604,"score_gpt":0.40858407192709506,"score_spread":0.34542161207923905,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4384697900","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.91589034,0.00072423916,0.00021468852,0.0014801515,0.0030980958,0.0009419997,0.00008631685,0.00041536993,0.07714882],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.46483505,0.0011074643,0.0068913093,0.00018242944,0.00023708143,0.0001434038,0.00047440053,0.000095032425,0.5260338],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99756885,0.00019646421,0.0006260744,0.00046723467,0.0008531299,0.00028824416],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99764603,0.000828921,0.0004935674,0.00028314636,0.0005780138,0.00017029392],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008914581,0.00023380647,0.00039970037,0.0003567979,0.0006437556,0.00019444515,0.00041228754,0.00052834,0.00048747292],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0018265316,0.00021581382,0.00008976274,0.00072845333,0.00016234894,0.00028638903,0.00006525432,0.00033237785,0.00009602419],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0007091022,0.0005540624,0.00068236847,0.0008012745,0.0004904292,0.000052980547,0.38255027,0.00055636,0.0053220065,0.085961945,0.43025097,0.09206825],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0032871587,0.00039435053,0.05394039,0.003351822,0.0012308366,0.000009044772,0.5297715,0.0003079818,0.00993936,0.087181084,0.30693227,0.0036542],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00025137194,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.024721138,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.45105526,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003574859,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00078680296,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99307513},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4385600680","doi":"10.59962/9780774828314-013","title":"Jury Nullification in Canadian Political Protest Trials: Turning Loose the “12 Angry Men”","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"University of British Columbia Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Nullification; Jury; Politics; Political science; Law; Psychology","score_opus":0.09795584286661055,"score_gpt":0.2946991918588939,"score_spread":0.19674334899228338,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4385600680","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000572622,0.00053820084,0.0000095849555,0.00020204589,0.00017119708,0.0012408815,0.00042479901,0.000057182115,0.9967835],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.080860324,0.00009026408,0.00018033163,0.00006143458,0.00019491362,0.000003073777,0.000025206407,0.000032761058,0.9185517],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99737316,0.00037012636,0.00042592423,0.00043463227,0.00076774316,0.000628423],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99756175,0.0005951318,0.0004356998,0.00034324924,0.00052860245,0.0005355629],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00340671,0.00013706644,0.00058195426,0.00013869996,0.0004590701,0.00033807405,0.00094045425,0.0005337882,0.00047815518],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013796287,0.00024820666,0.00015329552,0.00003020682,0.00086938497,0.00014326395,0.00014643534,0.0005180781,0.000025071186],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001074277,0.00008238547,0.0005317023,0.000220912,0.00021093596,0.00096046214,0.009174458,0.00001186656,0.000004013876,0.27695614,0.32189247,0.38984722],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003952258,0.000026271418,0.001008522,0.0005755311,0.00009309299,0.000007740962,0.0009882535,0.000010246552,4.2720086e-7,0.019052502,0.97756326,0.0002789297],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9621575,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99506265,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.65567076,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00083220744,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0033904535,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999997},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4387320593","doi":"10.31219/osf.io/m3s5p","title":"The biases of experts: An empirical analysis of expert witness challenges","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Jurisprudence; Witness; Position (finance); White (mutation); White paper; Affect (linguistics); Law; Political science; Psychology; Business","score_opus":0.26655080888134924,"score_gpt":0.48775398358589256,"score_spread":0.22120317470454331,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4387320593","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.84800285,0.043810487,0.003182369,0.010025328,0.0020749934,0.001026259,0.000071657465,0.00027017112,0.0915359],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9849614,0.013047639,0.00059672294,0.00010285876,0.00012974795,0.0000325758,0.0000092473865,0.000016939224,0.0011028993],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9966856,0.0005806539,0.00065377296,0.0005620573,0.0012342014,0.00028371497],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99450326,0.002940808,0.0005707126,0.001180999,0.0007041657,0.000100084784],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016204288,0.00021855923,0.0008286854,0.00039073126,0.00020621714,0.00009083275,0.0016636607,0.00037643142,0.0003924189],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001994814,0.00013759042,0.00038818884,0.000824835,0.0008099874,0.00013362516,0.00056042115,0.0001730018,0.000004359696],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00039123045,0.001904263,0.017258838,0.00039503563,0.0060738227,0.000008886016,0.41780284,0.011521363,0.00014096305,0.07178013,0.011586653,0.46113595],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007162787,0.000509183,0.05323236,0.001171258,0.0026721323,9.933668e-7,0.655731,0.0057312115,0.0029918936,0.03827591,0.23655316,0.002414586],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0018576909,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008508578,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.45872137,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000051773324,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005857639,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5610775},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4388736625","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0053.9584","title":"The Rule of Law Messages of the Anglo-Saxon Identification Procedures in Criminal Cases","year":2023,"lang":"pl","type":"article","venue":"Internal Security","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Humanities; Criminal justice; Political science; Legislator; Criminal law; Cartography; Philosophy; Geography; Legislation","score_opus":0.044656886429929515,"score_gpt":0.37380417458352716,"score_spread":0.3291472881535976,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4388736625","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9917359,0.0013934448,0.0000033786482,0.0018295537,0.000994739,0.00030247212,0.00006773214,0.000027370286,0.0036454543],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9981276,0.00061558024,0.0000047577637,0.000057826124,0.00011082112,0.000016563814,0.0000012143644,0.0000112758635,0.0010543987],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9972318,0.0004070437,0.00074527337,0.0002920117,0.0010042286,0.0003196666],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9972461,0.0013227082,0.0006583192,0.00037133435,0.00035552916,0.000046004247],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0018862745,0.000151415,0.00024879858,0.000093142,0.00038721663,0.00015105272,0.0013919835,0.00012290054,0.0000628192],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0030542014,0.00009698226,0.00016625234,0.0009590056,0.0010935554,0.0002360815,0.0003382402,0.0002867396,0.00003489995],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0013641594,0.0015643372,0.08942253,0.0033723412,0.00033365624,0.00017423912,0.44493005,0.0002461557,0.0099571645,0.38591343,0.019047843,0.043674093],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008270522,0.0002652649,0.6287698,0.0036014172,0.0002418639,0.000039362498,0.058483504,0.00044833517,0.09788736,0.16487335,0.04393229,0.0006303606],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0076138587,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.029766008,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5393473,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000072734954,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00024095144,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989945},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4389158615","doi":"10.21428/cb6ab371.955b9491","title":"Convicting the Innocent: An Analysis of the Effects of Wrongful Convictions and Available Remedies in Canada","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"CrimRxiv","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminology; Psychology; Wrongful death; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.02976241860230201,"score_gpt":0.30566909145196935,"score_spread":0.27590667284966736,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4389158615","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9972802,0.00032722985,0.0000039214333,0.0007158388,0.00027009746,0.00012387127,0.000004784873,0.000013210053,0.0012608374],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99936175,0.0001606598,0.000008838666,0.00010069639,0.000016320257,0.0000070995525,8.408775e-7,0.0000040286723,0.00033974592],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99895257,0.00020029709,0.00021276217,0.00013547325,0.00033362888,0.00016528105],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981795,0.0013057942,0.0001336594,0.00022317581,0.00012578501,0.000032068856],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006986667,0.000054969078,0.00017411193,0.00014067313,0.00030124254,0.000020521655,0.00028675733,0.00002862692,0.00005218092],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001781982,0.00003535051,0.000032700795,0.0026706993,0.00028235427,0.00008656113,0.0000767941,0.000083284365,0.0000016939074],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000049385267,0.000014725489,0.97844833,0.000072840245,0.00010170903,0.0000022376155,0.014325297,0.00024015678,0.00036076177,0.0030155927,0.0017988848,0.0016145358],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001365578,0.000012839543,0.96242756,0.00007356999,0.00023813715,1.508933e-7,0.025913421,0.0009248592,0.0013040166,0.0005264952,0.00836105,0.000081342674],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6523511,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9544857,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.30213463,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000057124795,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005959069,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.34996396},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4392001975","doi":"10.1177/08862605241229720","title":"Prototypes of Hate and Expectations of the Model Victim","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Interpersonal Violence","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University; Toronto Metropolitan University","funders":"","keywords":"Human factors and ergonomics; Poison control; Psychology; Suicide prevention; Injury prevention; Occupational safety and health; Social psychology; Criminology; Medical emergency; Medicine; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.020885614610437416,"score_gpt":0.3460896878780926,"score_spread":0.32520407326765516,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4392001975","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98945564,0.0038261765,0.003226397,0.0013322313,0.0003267023,0.00013436933,0.000008552813,0.0000073321753,0.0016825915],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978902,0.00036403406,0.0015746854,0.00002897918,0.00004943364,0.0000022636593,2.007396e-8,0.0000040953964,0.00008634147],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9990801,0.00005660253,0.00029127471,0.000071122035,0.00042474733,0.000076146796],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99916816,0.0002193289,0.00020883318,0.00005597145,0.00031204376,0.000035656765],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00042338384,0.000048073613,0.0001223833,0.00008991008,0.000070398215,0.000035366636,0.00028514225,0.000031897,0.00002815912],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00042208092,0.000030736064,0.00009088318,0.00023160482,0.00027588807,0.00023831805,0.00003581816,0.00013827112,0.0000013068653],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0005809338,0.0003558722,0.00926812,0.0009290081,0.0003750021,0.000038916554,0.39255226,0.0025979772,0.030786026,0.08817961,0.001977065,0.47235924],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016382526,0.0021403788,0.026261255,0.07309635,0.0006603752,0.00048007487,0.33491325,0.09590918,0.086395636,0.36543155,0.011844056,0.001229645],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000016616043,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00002268816,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4711296,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002582251,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00035388698,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.12533803},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4392053195","doi":"10.51644/9781554581573-fm","title":"Front Matter","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"paratext","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"D2L (Canada)","funders":"Wilfrid Laurier University","keywords":"Front (military); Physics; Meteorology","score_opus":0.030384450609000937,"score_gpt":0.3612806638969365,"score_spread":0.3308962132879356,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4392053195","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000024274685,0.0009725659,0.0012689832,0.0012855459,0.0032983865,0.00014713116,0.000023884963,0.00005709729,0.9929221],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0008139982,0.00012237616,0.0010706416,0.0014052782,0.0014870598,0.0000135559185,0.0000388871,0.000027113907,0.9950211],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9983976,0.00009561448,0.0002307942,0.00032716204,0.0006058323,0.00034301195],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992877,0.00014412797,0.00012055316,0.00024499616,0.00013226076,0.00007031076],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002690498,0.00016532597,0.00024888758,0.000115006886,0.00028012588,0.00025970142,0.000555555,0.00039308288,0.53394127],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000046729652,0.00014180633,0.000090117304,0.00013195263,0.00015301192,0.0000994274,0.000068185465,0.00020940561,0.7138519],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000012816171,0.00001194525,0.000022884991,0.000012374173,0.000004894478,0.0000015757812,0.00019730169,0.000005226125,2.4403585e-7,0.0003902965,0.99667484,0.002677155],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000033662862,0.000003314582,0.00012322699,0.000032782016,0.0000074851755,2.3463333e-7,0.000117047945,2.15171e-7,0.0000059981667,0.0008138217,0.9986603,0.00020185896],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0035678607,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0024053873,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.17991067,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009900738,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00038456963,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5782695},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4394835492","doi":"10.4324/9781003087496-8","title":"Contributions of Ethnography of Science to Judicial Assessment of Environmental Expert Testimony","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Ethnography; Sociology; Epistemology; Political science; Philosophy; Anthropology","score_opus":0.04017482967030465,"score_gpt":0.4020841904690692,"score_spread":0.3619093607987645,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4394835492","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0016173354,0.0008863967,0.0010453768,0.000519834,0.0006097372,0.00053582375,0.0006202007,0.000045744568,0.9941195],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94252664,0.00029528397,0.0047872425,0.000088058274,0.000108817265,0.000011251242,0.0000053695676,0.00002229663,0.052155044],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99686635,0.000018331802,0.0006417278,0.00041299063,0.001806471,0.00025411844],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985419,0.00034444482,0.0003456404,0.00032160096,0.0002918665,0.00015456427],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010924859,0.00018670628,0.00048606496,0.00075878494,0.00021586505,0.00002788976,0.00074577297,0.00020098011,0.0013768312],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000273767,0.00017139841,0.00020700727,0.0004445458,0.0043903734,0.00012028941,0.00030061303,0.00019196459,0.00002221999],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000009721718,0.00010002213,0.00009364081,0.000036555113,0.0000560196,0.0000029600599,0.002402232,0.000011090134,0.0077966326,0.97626257,0.0022366508,0.010991905],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005944712,0.0012162899,0.005249106,0.0025264295,0.0004017579,0.0000028833922,0.007157873,0.000046877056,0.021911085,0.34083158,0.61868167,0.0013799972],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00033346028,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00016785064,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9419645,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001717996,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001017452,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99953604},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4394930922","doi":"10.3389/fcogn.2024.1354057","title":"Juror decision-making and biracial targets","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Frontiers in Cognition","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University; Campion College; University of Regina","funders":"Canadian Psychological Association","keywords":"Psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.016565484600881916,"score_gpt":0.3458954159580588,"score_spread":0.32932993135717686,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4394930922","genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.24959037,0.0294308,0.5788293,0.0031152503,0.020620828,0.0010836651,0.00006888877,0.0010014463,0.11625947],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9754233,0.00046655917,0.02344193,0.00017117648,0.00028401724,0.00001457523,0.0000031077177,0.0000136221515,0.000181737],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9988973,0.00007753536,0.00017723556,0.00028312893,0.00034831083,0.0002164616],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99941134,0.0003837545,0.000029388682,0.000060844322,0.00006522826,0.0000494534],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000661394,0.00008288555,0.000115017094,0.0003440077,0.00024274885,0.00025923565,0.00010946924,0.00010811325,0.00012251774],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0012035856,0.000084268766,0.000030133515,0.0005867168,0.00015726215,0.00045004385,0.000035750818,0.00014934682,0.000051441773],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000031998916,0.000013894974,0.0008806372,0.000021246282,0.0000070473116,0.00004742351,0.0027860652,0.000002753305,0.000007369462,0.0019402956,0.022224998,0.97203624],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00026044063,0.00003525958,0.006930103,0.0009910652,0.000038549002,0.0000054573693,0.004008493,0.00097512815,0.00003928195,0.665124,0.32128096,0.00031123476],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000008529479,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00013434752,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.97172505,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007203176,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00012810284,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.34363806},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4396508164","doi":"10.22215/etd/2024-15924","title":"Indigenous Canadians take the Stand: The Influence of Age and Race on Mock-Juror Perceptions and Verdict Decisions","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Eyewitness testimony; Eyewitness identification; Jury; Psychology; Punitive damages; Indigenous; Race (biology); Perception; Criminology; Social psychology; White (mutation); Law; Political science; Gender studies; Sociology","score_opus":0.02133272425191525,"score_gpt":0.34673919716867896,"score_spread":0.3254064729167637,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4396508164","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97311205,0.0022904046,0.0000077724335,0.0010315003,0.00025123777,0.0005271353,0.00009831645,0.00004058954,0.022640979],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.966536,0.004273872,0.000048260456,0.00024000634,0.00005889096,0.000033061217,0.000017558446,0.00002401769,0.02876834],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99827045,0.00015227067,0.00028968535,0.00034330544,0.00067854335,0.00026572784],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99750376,0.0017218132,0.00013221653,0.00032591465,0.00019301737,0.0001232717],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00070010027,0.00019057555,0.00022740246,0.0001808988,0.001517436,0.0003999656,0.00051168754,0.00021829095,0.00012129839],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011973657,0.00010775169,0.000058918587,0.00054846116,0.00042151395,0.00012603516,0.000042153202,0.00043629896,0.000028305305],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000108616776,0.00006546607,0.00041222086,0.00014360862,0.00016175317,0.00008718251,0.7533243,0.00042955694,0.00014304457,0.023155909,0.013127625,0.20884076],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00023901997,0.00020603725,0.43850434,0.0014123957,0.00037746973,0.00001000373,0.3782093,0.000013885905,0.000016424128,0.031332623,0.14908046,0.00059804093],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.019114219,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4400459,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4380921,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007886156,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011141865,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99978244},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4396515540","doi":"10.22215/etd/2024-15984","title":"Evaluating Mock Jurors’ Judgements on Eyewitness Age, Inconsistencies and Crime Type","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Innocence; Psychology; Sentence; Eyewitness testimony; Perception; Criminal justice; Social psychology; Criminology; Eyewitness identification; Law; Political science; Relation (database)","score_opus":0.18324029657117988,"score_gpt":0.5071008761123229,"score_spread":0.323860579541143,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4396515540","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.38962093,0.0011030559,0.000002102485,0.0001850714,0.0032921983,0.00037386987,0.000005113929,0.00022936435,0.60518825],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5352374,0.00024879776,0.0007311414,0.00026276105,0.00025827257,0.000031600473,0.00009189321,0.00005433012,0.46308383],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9974009,0.00015689775,0.00035743922,0.00058913877,0.0011885937,0.00030706628],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985891,0.00045029185,0.00016360739,0.00022217122,0.00047401918,0.000100785284],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001041112,0.00026326778,0.00031207968,0.0002928802,0.0005449173,0.00053625467,0.0003379799,0.0002921081,0.00067288434],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022567718,0.00023014762,0.0000631472,0.00061960827,0.00011278725,0.00015820777,0.00006669786,0.0003162042,0.00059139647],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000520414,0.000321637,0.000427572,0.0025767141,0.00055537815,0.0002256553,0.1294033,0.00004954332,0.0009826972,0.23718953,0.098546125,0.52920145],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0012096424,0.0013765217,0.04660569,0.006207051,0.0016539461,0.000005644529,0.20441942,0.00025271447,0.0018156739,0.33029655,0.40215337,0.0040037706],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00033630352,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002751293,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5251977,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009631082,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00062704226,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.93851477},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4399056288","doi":"10.1515/auk-2024-2008","title":"Must I Honor Your Convictions? On Laura Valentini’s Agency-Respect View","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Analyse & Kritik","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Concordia University","funders":"","keywords":"Honor; Agency (philosophy); Sociology; Philosophy; Epistemology; Computer science; Internet privacy","score_opus":0.08372088224536242,"score_gpt":0.41913109043609553,"score_spread":0.3354102081907331,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4399056288","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.30236906,0.02398378,0.0014449288,0.018838204,0.005000845,0.0007833768,0.00012064774,0.0019237022,0.64553547],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9813964,0.0019039349,0.00020497359,0.000764149,0.0007464741,0.000024556895,0.000008119139,0.00002786113,0.014923549],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977983,0.00022041706,0.00035659323,0.00051450485,0.0007027502,0.0004074134],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99879074,0.00046372393,0.00006775674,0.0003433243,0.00017108618,0.00016335683],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009274047,0.0001777496,0.00025785604,0.00035432292,0.0006584551,0.00059407705,0.0004268213,0.00011682539,0.0040214523],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005794073,0.00016367048,0.00025224336,0.0016161228,0.00017882271,0.00035757595,0.000056227567,0.0002759633,0.003414345],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000495586,0.0004330239,0.0019035797,0.00029614556,0.0005818223,0.00080768456,0.019775681,0.000112588285,0.00039384275,0.24116595,0.25719437,0.47728574],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013937257,0.00006590136,0.0027207432,0.00035216712,0.00019460627,0.0000061982,0.0033000063,0.000107160085,0.00015634898,0.0143874455,0.97823805,0.0003319821],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005766512,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0013528592,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7210437,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00011518792,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00032632728,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9973616},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4402684519","doi":"10.69971/jksrvn06","title":"Comparative Analysis of Rights of Victim in The Criminal Proceedings in India: Need for improving Victim Justice","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal research & analysis.","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminology; Criminal justice; Economic Justice; Political science; Law; Psychology; Sociology","score_opus":0.11048375778306513,"score_gpt":0.49398733448010673,"score_spread":0.3835035766970416,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4402684519","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9679999,0.0008320552,0.0008869663,0.0010436369,0.000059568632,0.00074967614,0.00003612487,0.000026768486,0.02836533],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989908,0.000023641434,0.00054178707,0.000027919803,0.000072926814,0.00008898728,0.00000962897,0.000006347902,0.00023801213],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99562204,0.0004796583,0.0007214299,0.00051419524,0.0020620262,0.0006006641],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99420226,0.004093441,0.00017550486,0.00023047825,0.0012102642,0.00008805408],"candidate_categories":["bibliometrics"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010355088,0.0001445329,0.0007734084,0.005497124,0.00034399203,0.00036908872,0.0010002528,0.00013198954,0.00009074474],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0024392277,0.00010406148,0.00038230745,0.030777821,0.0005368899,0.00059422257,0.000108605134,0.00062590133,0.000004881918],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008968061,0.0010200763,0.021313354,0.0015273518,0.00669814,0.00010095643,0.585413,0.0050285542,0.0023729044,0.36843842,0.0015666716,0.0056237825],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010356993,0.00074832345,0.2187574,0.00038854693,0.025622409,0.0000012993501,0.5244487,0.19111785,0.0026657747,0.018012993,0.016430072,0.0007709135],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.013791977,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.035451848,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.35042542,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00021989903,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006033369,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99277526},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4403053478","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.4942004","title":"Reversing the Presumption: Admitting Prior Inconsistent Statements for Their Truth","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Presumption; Reversing; Epistemology; Philosophy; Psychology; Law; Political science; Engineering","score_opus":0.048399250059739246,"score_gpt":0.3967679050243242,"score_spread":0.3483686549645849,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4403053478","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.57373595,0.117106445,0.1978722,0.069992796,0.0131375985,0.0036266167,0.000050791557,0.00091322773,0.02356437],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99188703,0.0030541923,0.000313657,0.00011222526,0.000880551,0.000014808251,0.0000010901164,0.000021319775,0.0037151023],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9973257,0.00020742444,0.0003151271,0.00021840614,0.00044746275,0.0014858667],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986361,0.0008833538,0.0001366919,0.000120861405,0.00015290643,0.00007008528],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006955085,0.00011463001,0.00012028306,0.00009244804,0.0018990024,0.0005651023,0.00043128154,0.000058070407,0.00004571556],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007649183,0.00007427233,0.00015156833,0.00029492017,0.00010177799,0.00050644734,0.000042832908,0.00087494357,0.000021519812],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006028531,0.00002620486,0.00013546654,0.000031582233,0.00020089038,0.0000027886156,0.0070053735,0.00003017081,0.00002825264,0.35370564,0.0009875407,0.6377858],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003304932,0.00014033803,0.0001407588,0.0002262023,0.000076896045,0.00006791863,0.034845024,0.0001866838,0.00005144487,0.5679256,0.3958338,0.00017488643],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000026338123,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00078891806,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6376109,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0010399594,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003697739,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994004},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4404240682","doi":"10.1007/s11896-024-09721-7","title":"Perceptions in a Sexual Assault Trial: The Influence of Age and Race on Canadian Mock-Jurors","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Legal psychology; Race (biology); Psychology; Sexual assault; Social psychology; Perception; Criminology; Human factors and ergonomics; Poison control; Medical emergency; Sociology; Medicine; Gender studies","score_opus":0.0731506259515501,"score_gpt":0.4549452428883783,"score_spread":0.3817946169368282,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4404240682","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9875756,0.00031849786,0.0000054484685,0.009052183,0.00021455662,0.000072605326,0.0000038791313,0.0000033925126,0.0027538459],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9979074,0.0003975347,0.000041728534,0.0011802065,0.0001924747,0.0000014863856,9.328446e-8,0.000004955898,0.00027413145],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99898994,0.00020487564,0.00028802364,0.00011437628,0.00022284531,0.0001799113],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99922556,0.00037517797,0.000100985155,0.00007927835,0.00009011896,0.0001288661],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010869567,0.00006598309,0.0001574341,0.00034759426,0.00012583556,0.000061689294,0.00019567953,0.00010399644,0.000032993008],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00028658914,0.000045816403,0.000028236735,0.00028415176,0.00033743854,0.00014207819,0.000011883777,0.000355306,0.000004602477],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.006012659,0.00044377125,0.0051195775,0.00020481554,0.00015175324,0.00089155283,0.6488829,0.00032713547,0.0045319046,0.030587131,0.028749162,0.2740976],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004146156,0.0025780867,0.74782604,0.00031623594,0.00016649292,0.00043135608,0.1253218,0.000009229556,0.000007886919,0.011852924,0.107098594,0.00024515644],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.061622597,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.23176944,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7427065,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000034631536,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00030512305,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.94462615},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4404565621","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.4976706","title":"Revisiting Jury Instructions on Racial Prejudice Towards Indigenous Peoples in Canadian Criminal Trials","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Indigenous; Prejudice (legal term); Jury; Criminology; Criminal trial; Political science; Psychology; Law","score_opus":0.05078202054788365,"score_gpt":0.3890117572495591,"score_spread":0.33822973670167544,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4404565621","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9406886,0.021622429,0.00017956836,0.0066078575,0.0061344104,0.001059398,0.00010108817,0.0001632587,0.023443395],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9743116,0.018565828,0.00018713462,0.00016618619,0.0053185695,0.00004316403,0.00001312505,0.00006912573,0.0013253058],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99074435,0.0015031485,0.0013560117,0.0007304867,0.0012644104,0.0044015804],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99739397,0.00068246457,0.00077057676,0.00032792217,0.00034390914,0.00048117424],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.023119966,0.000440349,0.00095409784,0.0017843535,0.0014533381,0.0010544753,0.001237409,0.0007085655,0.00017271466],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009460987,0.0004340895,0.00045471865,0.0009343148,0.00016750667,0.00019312424,0.0002823529,0.010117733,0.00011660809],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001357237,0.000054518165,0.00039929833,0.00019834716,0.0002930164,0.00013722785,0.0548406,0.00044841928,0.000004894034,0.1951466,0.00026014305,0.7480812],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00051349826,0.00020221945,0.0020402856,0.0020775136,0.00046929801,0.0003036933,0.049598854,0.00001374809,0.000014131745,0.9112853,0.03255609,0.0009253569],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3046452,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.95212305,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.74715585,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011970631,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.15694787,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99998254},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4407287059","doi":"10.1007/s11896-025-09733-x","title":"Mock-juror Decision-making: The Influence of Inconsistencies, Situation Type, and Defendant and Victim Race","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Legal psychology; Race (biology); Psychology; Social psychology; Criminology; Sociology","score_opus":0.031037088290996356,"score_gpt":0.4188701306738431,"score_spread":0.38783304238284677,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4407287059","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9914313,0.002159834,0.0002664335,0.0034381389,0.00017423606,0.00005659412,0.0000011143944,0.0000034535808,0.0024688975],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9957032,0.0016581237,0.0008960412,0.001606858,0.000057191002,5.4957746e-7,4.2532147e-8,0.0000031158581,0.0000748642],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99903435,0.00014146301,0.00035597768,0.00012377277,0.00021259858,0.00013182168],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99791783,0.0011085115,0.00032078894,0.00010404784,0.00049377425,0.000055017055],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000929532,0.00007545594,0.00019806647,0.00019165248,0.0002567491,0.000049108312,0.00019336044,0.00008806248,0.000009574648],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013072682,0.000052361516,0.000023482055,0.00034418365,0.0004649591,0.00018430444,0.000061018905,0.0001736425,8.7563274e-7],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0034223287,0.00041291476,0.055940326,0.00031843188,0.00031703786,0.00005656345,0.18320747,0.00016880727,0.007467964,0.06784985,0.0202735,0.66056484],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006328866,0.0004442139,0.87125784,0.00037831394,0.00024340647,0.00032007718,0.026977092,0.000010190318,0.00004029206,0.07347894,0.02608432,0.00013244584],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00015608534,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00028170197,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8153175,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000134075735,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001943866,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21352407},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4408151295","doi":"10.37566/2707-6849-2024-4(49)-12","title":"Hearsay evidence in US civil courts: simplifying the rules of evidence to improve standards of fairness","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Slovo of the National School of Judges of Ukraine","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Hearsay; Law; Civil litigation; Political science; Civil procedure; Rules of evidence; Admissible evidence; Law and economics; Computer science; Sociology","score_opus":0.11001119520542055,"score_gpt":0.44052890202559897,"score_spread":0.33051770682017845,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4408151295","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9726673,0.0042027934,0.00046762777,0.017412808,0.0003091983,0.0007954015,0.00027515073,0.000012136607,0.0038576233],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99820834,0.0003075666,0.0009356249,0.0002041755,0.000043700624,0.000012193043,4.8936107e-7,0.0000068078166,0.00028111372],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99572104,0.00031997001,0.000932895,0.00023780587,0.0025896248,0.00019864824],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9910374,0.004399588,0.00080046616,0.00033434297,0.0033782958,0.00004985259],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0066967094,0.00012728019,0.0004405163,0.00029144937,0.0001109376,0.000018635206,0.001460558,0.00009584676,0.00012443494],"category_scores_gemma":[0.055558097,0.00008097616,0.00015638684,0.0011765228,0.0006686806,0.00036175796,0.00036632683,0.00017764195,0.000001314103],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0044645346,0.0015580143,0.32835844,0.0062346095,0.0008408231,0.0000027736103,0.02744925,0.044918835,0.2819027,0.19877256,0.041106004,0.06439145],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001451413,0.0004871438,0.71442854,0.015110182,0.00016972763,0.0000013929376,0.004061929,0.00020448629,0.10972384,0.14312036,0.0107867895,0.00045419246],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010634466,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011181107,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.38607007,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002351406,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0020429203,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.95239735},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4409064537","doi":"10.1037/lhb0000599","title":"The psychological allure of Alford: Does wanting to appear innocent put innocents at risk?","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Ontario Tech University","funders":"American Psychology-Law Society","keywords":"Psychology; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Psychoanalysis; Clinical psychology; Psychotherapist","score_opus":0.027782248457843283,"score_gpt":0.401542682750218,"score_spread":0.3737604342923747,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4409064537","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98151356,0.00011909033,0.000010739369,0.0007278218,0.00028395746,0.00029107256,0.000009292138,0.00004232052,0.017002128],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99468315,0.00006260597,0.00017673925,0.0004063729,0.000053594205,0.00002669484,0.0000013586637,0.000005869783,0.0045836377],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9987987,0.00010346066,0.0002718764,0.00025909618,0.00030042324,0.0002664452],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99937177,0.00011511281,0.00011171594,0.00021359007,0.00012092446,0.00006688727],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006346353,0.00009663256,0.0001490712,0.000044801127,0.0017871913,0.00012880412,0.000375463,0.00009469829,0.00014056091],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00011470776,0.00005791775,0.000042201722,0.0002466496,0.0004253703,0.00006523812,0.00022598974,0.00014102447,0.000013064979],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000055186763,0.00028057004,0.21487924,0.000023811705,0.000016763252,0.0000075139956,0.003838617,5.773336e-7,0.0007122617,0.6485298,0.0023805741,0.12927507],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00035556918,0.000086485226,0.41061223,0.00008910781,0.000062563406,6.3612276e-7,0.0011274023,3.1478842e-7,0.0005752992,0.011470575,0.57544667,0.00017315423],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003600642,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0049230433,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6370593,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000029589555,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00001947008,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995124},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4409388356","doi":"10.1093/library/fpae040","title":"Judging a Cover by Its Book","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Library","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Toronto Public Health","funders":"","keywords":"Cover (algebra); Art history; Art; Engineering","score_opus":0.020879612702937946,"score_gpt":0.3138877632043275,"score_spread":0.29300815050138956,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4409388356","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.017143536,0.053325657,0.00018854984,0.074551895,0.0011515791,0.00022778125,0.00002545591,0.0011906748,0.85219485],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6266092,0.00096206594,0.000077911274,0.0072547207,0.0005466976,0.000009082818,0.000002966621,0.000025669504,0.36451167],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992711,0.00008753108,0.0000817568,0.00013391027,0.00025256383,0.00017314378],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994138,0.00040449822,0.000015465022,0.00011640023,0.0000060005955,0.000043853037],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00021563133,0.000054955755,0.000056029075,0.00003249273,0.0002588775,0.00046434766,0.00039830137,0.000038937767,0.0041996613],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000067153815,0.000036296067,0.00003500487,0.00035535873,0.000090559595,0.0012879159,0.00009248132,0.00011729336,0.0021744273],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000031570307,0.000004120327,0.000027225145,0.000009710693,0.0000058814207,0.000007485962,0.0027741916,0.0000017996383,0.00004839888,0.04479102,0.94066554,0.011661483],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000018186058,0.0000041551766,0.00003441094,0.0000433642,0.000004651157,7.7439694e-7,0.0001861255,0.000056877914,0.00044690305,0.013741317,0.9854064,0.000056816127],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0000059217655,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":5.721783e-7,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.60946566,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000008338702,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00016575075,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9986025},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4409423628","doi":"10.1007/s11896-025-09742-w","title":"When Indigenous Canadians Take the Stand: The Influence of Age and Race on Mock-Juror Perceptions and Verdict Decisions","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Legal psychology; Race (biology); Indigenous; Psychology; Perception; Social psychology; Criminology; Law; Sociology; Political science; Gender studies","score_opus":0.043692333925363154,"score_gpt":0.4105204892131926,"score_spread":0.36682815528782947,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4409423628","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98405033,0.0012490934,0.000088379,0.01154815,0.00011210022,0.00009441191,0.00000970343,0.000002837375,0.002845006],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9930293,0.0032257077,0.00010381096,0.0031913759,0.00007582895,0.0000016509526,8.715316e-8,0.0000040178406,0.00036820266],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99895775,0.00021504615,0.00028861282,0.000121670506,0.00022296673,0.00019397427],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983936,0.0009866281,0.0001947732,0.0001545768,0.00016376642,0.00010665958],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00079961173,0.00008361475,0.00018463908,0.00018647121,0.000679091,0.00008129186,0.00032695432,0.00008518355,0.000019498862],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00041109812,0.000049309263,0.000036239508,0.00020014243,0.0007907143,0.00012266425,0.00003772574,0.00029332505,0.0000011806221],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0007054087,0.00022133019,0.009067404,0.000051080573,0.0001880647,0.00009512089,0.6484892,0.00010894781,0.0011792335,0.014741604,0.024367461,0.30078518],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00045312126,0.00041748217,0.86399794,0.00017474027,0.00016857775,0.00014560288,0.07151135,8.838552e-7,0.000004034402,0.017609406,0.045432817,0.000084029794],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00562053,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.018915992,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8549306,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000024724328,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002819385,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99898624},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4411088183","doi":"10.29173/wclawr124","title":"Coercion in the Courtroom","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Wrongful Conviction Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Université Laval; Université de Montréal","funders":"","keywords":"Voluntariness; Plea; Coercion (linguistics); Psychology; Criminal justice; Context (archaeology); Criminology; Social psychology; Economic Justice; Perception; Law; Political science; History","score_opus":0.037139315824581874,"score_gpt":0.41268092089294095,"score_spread":0.3755416050683591,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4411088183","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0025308477,0.15952751,0.0008421509,0.2155037,0.0013931697,0.0021684363,0.000003754639,0.00017453828,0.6178559],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8901676,0.0686165,0.000038935144,0.037765857,0.00015638517,0.00013580371,0.0000030348879,0.000008221816,0.0031076598],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99800867,0.00093438715,0.00030274226,0.00016751919,0.00039187717,0.00019482255],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998704,0.00065352337,0.00010187731,0.00038331142,0.00013658835,0.000020686239],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0040856213,0.00009065802,0.00018714987,0.000032230302,0.0006331062,0.00010258559,0.00067114044,0.000050818977,0.00034230037],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005424146,0.000050179264,0.000065603104,0.001038224,0.00027984873,0.00015537124,0.000042469048,0.00021692556,0.00027009458],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000004602985,0.000022269529,0.00007582112,0.00016062695,0.0000061728338,0.0000011314414,0.00075423595,0.0000032941111,0.0000014693723,0.93928766,0.02503736,0.034645338],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007875034,0.0000065729923,0.00077554584,0.0010156528,0.00003987648,0.0000013991355,0.00048864854,0.0000048698494,0.000002950031,0.009584001,0.987946,0.000055738168],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000677817,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0027827169,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9629086,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007521864,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00014589082,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4869405},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4411656749","doi":"10.51847/dejm0usghh","title":"10.51847/dEJm0USGHh","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Time to knit","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Quality (philosophy); Social psychology; Law; Criminology; Political science; Philosophy; Epistemology","score_opus":0.01685444453261447,"score_gpt":0.27211020752057635,"score_spread":0.2552557629879619,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4411656749","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0010805818,0.000052417385,0.0000019433764,0.0009782936,0.0000056825884,0.00012067005,0.0000037078769,0.0002022924,0.9975544],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.002213166,0.0000011491674,0.00026134928,0.00016638607,0.00020149258,0.000008299727,0.0000012984467,0.000012970762,0.9971339],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9988968,0.00007156837,0.00013263826,0.0002032245,0.00040619317,0.00028958957],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994024,0.00013724729,0.000022534417,0.00019555776,0.00007639053,0.00016587283],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00039522833,0.000080659214,0.00011174203,0.00006419184,0.00028456977,0.000107240456,0.00039386144,0.00006381341,0.99688345],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00028117796,0.00008027755,0.000038056256,0.000481352,0.00007880892,0.00014971427,0.000029649747,0.00006301573,0.9917403],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000017502243,0.000017830787,2.6449877e-7,0.0000010666329,0.0000024038145,0.0000029069324,0.00021682307,0.000017595314,0.000003966973,0.000029788598,0.06161557,0.9380743],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006347036,0.000030289892,0.000049029735,0.000010004074,0.000004651092,7.2989957e-7,0.000011061109,0.000004470474,0.0000058774654,0.00007393867,0.9996315,0.00011496828],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007601356,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0000034833108,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.93801594,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000040676532,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00010369481,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.32736233},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4412882037","doi":"10.1177/2755323x251362525","title":"Biased Evaluation of Pain and Suffering Damages","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of law & empirical analysis.","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Damages; Pain and suffering; Medicine; Psychology; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.1270860633107112,"score_gpt":0.4812245295753605,"score_spread":0.3541384662646493,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4412882037","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9739197,0.001503199,0.007078154,0.0058805984,0.000095502226,0.00006810985,0.000001352595,0.00000909459,0.0114443265],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9984036,0.00006942681,0.0008601376,0.00047074762,0.000053291275,6.5617314e-7,3.9810791e-7,0.0000023517982,0.00013939866],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99719864,0.0010012437,0.00053756894,0.00011124822,0.0010309413,0.00012038335],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9972286,0.0011805253,0.00038617165,0.00010605575,0.0010206696,0.000077961704],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01063612,0.00006627227,0.00037403093,0.0003778914,0.00016468894,0.000073508134,0.00021604655,0.000065956214,0.00013537476],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0037977071,0.000051482242,0.00019388809,0.0015900546,0.00019612358,0.00018724585,0.00003439435,0.00012456813,7.0953615e-7],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00029783105,0.0008619234,0.48128346,0.00016655604,0.0050812913,0.00003860944,0.013622054,0.013805425,0.0018369331,0.05892631,0.0099213645,0.41415823],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0026122225,0.00050383114,0.6433177,0.00054673717,0.016175628,0.0000042941074,0.007705148,0.018593984,0.0016652622,0.15370788,0.15458749,0.00057982036],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001449535,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00091638794,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.41357842,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006912798,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00029653858,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.45464846},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4413559840","doi":"10.64628/aam.aneeyunwc","title":"Louis Riel’s trial from 135 years ago continues today with competing cultural stories and icons","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"History; Psychology","score_opus":0.07574756029293088,"score_gpt":0.3669428805522243,"score_spread":0.2911953202592934,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4413559840","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9427342,0.00082420686,0.00036990066,0.004624898,0.0018457461,0.00081116776,0.00011298054,0.00042475617,0.04825218],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98669684,0.00020054758,0.0076666386,0.0003186029,0.0015588854,0.0000314956,0.00003973308,0.000027464212,0.0034597744],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9976,0.00027229998,0.00036370038,0.0007064276,0.0007450723,0.00031248003],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99804926,0.0008955198,0.00033079358,0.0002503176,0.0002779666,0.0001961282],"candidate_categories":["scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00045557192,0.0002775572,0.0005878062,0.000052092146,0.00037915105,0.0011590972,0.00054296036,0.00030492977,0.00044261187],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0015934528,0.00021919768,0.00008859013,0.00018612441,0.0006218495,0.00019454192,0.0006031858,0.00057159865,0.00003672917],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.014271969,0.0002868843,0.021327078,0.00025466472,0.0011094619,0.000316603,0.722587,0.00007356464,0.00018314077,0.07102306,0.09601484,0.07255176],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.011790197,0.00031368362,0.007290184,0.00069292716,0.0002977715,0.000001935308,0.13816147,0.000025922593,0.00016841835,0.022404756,0.81735724,0.0014954789],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0071974224,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005836376,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.72134244,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006617648,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00052276417,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998778},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4415534007","doi":"10.1080/1068316x.2025.2574904","title":"Juror decision-making concerning defendants with mental health conditions – a systematic review of experimental studies","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Psychology Crime and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Mental health; Empirical research; Systematic review; Quality (philosophy); Meta-analysis; Research design; Relation (database)","score_opus":0.06948580203470252,"score_gpt":0.5063649047153633,"score_spread":0.4368791026806608,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4415534007","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.045112435,0.8459264,0.00086898054,0.006710657,0.0010837942,0.0024456896,0.000053749733,0.00014829374,0.09765002],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98039675,0.0078043398,0.0009867471,0.010601059,0.000013604137,0.000057865913,0.000002019416,0.000006860889,0.00013074117],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"systematic_review","domain_scores_codex":[0.9985472,0.00029626812,0.00044633317,0.00027006888,0.00023417652,0.00020595932],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99873996,0.0006342906,0.00026036132,0.00018662101,0.00013026464,0.000048513695],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008237574,0.00011347311,0.00057136366,0.00008089685,0.00064401334,0.000021936432,0.00018296445,0.000042787622,0.000081415725],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003744848,0.00008690949,0.000042645,0.00021881872,0.0007593485,0.00011543259,0.00005398339,0.00008261958,0.000008466487],"study_design_candidate":"systematic_review","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00019262322,0.0004539419,0.0005371368,0.10094881,0.000741587,0.000023987384,0.02829382,4.797609e-7,0.0001767537,0.830055,0.034731813,0.0038440435],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002392805,0.0008398325,0.0012683398,0.87750053,0.00054304424,0.00010093775,0.06734525,0.000002595436,0.00027793046,0.022301653,0.026762228,0.00066487904],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000023975368,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00009223748,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9352843,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000048293507,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001186756,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4953295},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4415743583","doi":"10.1215/10539867-11834198","title":"Aligning Algorithmic Risk Assessments with Criminal Justice Values","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Federal Sentencing Reporter","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Institute on Governance","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal justice; Normative; Scholarship; Work (physics); Economic Justice; Risk assessment; State (computer science)","score_opus":0.03170214433171,"score_gpt":0.3848495185742753,"score_spread":0.3531473742425653,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4415743583","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.83074075,0.00015487138,0.07108595,0.0007254039,0.0016555892,0.00042223383,0.0000039608026,0.0003832982,0.094827935],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97253263,0.00003770706,0.015184447,0.00073833985,0.00032821042,0.00002274881,0.0000042090874,0.000020353376,0.011131345],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99738747,0.00020669207,0.00046897904,0.00054038846,0.00088373636,0.00051271165],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99845743,0.00029962073,0.00038244118,0.00030325024,0.00043934357,0.00011788677],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001214532,0.00020193215,0.0002639311,0.00016312239,0.0017504819,0.000509729,0.00028217988,0.00010629672,0.0000920361],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00085065793,0.00016784991,0.00007974799,0.00047719709,0.0001744226,0.00041421136,0.00009101821,0.00024417648,0.000023030969],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000514942,0.00063347735,0.4305744,0.00075564,0.0009883892,0.0027780116,0.041072927,0.0007442078,0.0011455884,0.0053387433,0.05998999,0.4554637],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.005001524,0.001110604,0.30929017,0.004766468,0.00633192,0.00059976376,0.4606533,0.0047360426,0.004899683,0.04204467,0.15639992,0.004165934],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003197995,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0013254635,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.45129776,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00021998443,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006048953,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995491},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4416795734","doi":"10.37284/eajle.8.2.4084","title":"Preparations of Witnesses Vis-à-vis Coaching of Witnesses in Mainland Tanzania: A Practical and Ethical Dilemma to Legal Practitioners","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"East African Journal of Law and Ethics","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Duty; Dilemma; Context (archaeology); Coaching; Professional conduct; Diligence; Ethical code; Ethical dilemma","score_opus":0.058375730572756926,"score_gpt":0.4098119200073007,"score_spread":0.3514361894345438,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4416795734","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6306201,0.002239908,0.037998065,0.29087326,0.0013069707,0.0008583095,0.000092947375,0.000022281494,0.035988104],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.992546,0.0005471445,0.0057227924,0.00094586395,0.00013682111,0.00000495324,7.387947e-7,0.00001571415,0.000079924015],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9942939,0.0018497016,0.0016395692,0.0003901306,0.0014291677,0.0003974826],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9888533,0.0072079347,0.0014161007,0.00020906363,0.0019638203,0.0003498064],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008428974,0.0002814791,0.0009511939,0.00049802463,0.0006481782,0.00027114587,0.0003456291,0.0007180631,0.00004126745],"category_scores_gemma":[0.019095145,0.00025527348,0.00011864344,0.0014943501,0.0025015345,0.00097350846,0.00021629433,0.0031488102,8.0129195e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00129747,0.00043157337,0.0026257974,0.0005940415,0.00017009811,0.00008131225,0.060959443,0.00061577454,0.00038430913,0.9320013,0.00029187082,0.0005470077],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.009007107,0.0072417436,0.026791228,0.021859828,0.0028317892,0.001805857,0.39354473,0.00091788074,0.0018520833,0.29140094,0.24019203,0.0025547948],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005189314,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003576403,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6406004,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008703172,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004917946,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999899},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4417031983","doi":"10.4324/9781003376248-2","title":"Canada","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Supreme court; Adversarial system; Verdict; Government (linguistics); High Court; Criminal code; Criminal court; Criminal procedure","score_opus":0.028425938642274606,"score_gpt":0.31167644416479545,"score_spread":0.28325050552252085,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4417031983","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[1.5582634e-7,0.00031041357,0.000046805482,0.0028379655,0.0006949273,0.00008011958,0.000017441265,0.000056181718,0.995956],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0003417113,0.00015588432,0.00019567362,0.0020422055,0.00017188369,0.0000011347568,0.0000027036037,0.000008306,0.9970805],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989734,0.000007963024,0.00013411112,0.00018743578,0.0005551935,0.00014189482],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993167,0.00024391398,0.00005757222,0.0001659266,0.00015120555,0.00006466772],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00014043115,0.000102189166,0.00014744198,0.000056174867,0.00020623876,0.000048150265,0.0003503559,0.00016618354,0.009285606],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00020143617,0.000096829004,0.00003709494,0.000031456675,0.00007247912,0.000027515745,0.000056162397,0.00013966922,0.00010843703],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[3.4688696e-7,2.7485433e-7,4.3846262e-7,0.000003233091,0.0000041717467,0.000004846777,0.000016188345,8.1851645e-8,5.6635057e-9,0.52782345,0.44709018,0.02505676],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000013525088,0.0000012698548,0.0000023806035,0.000047663772,0.000008267411,8.1666755e-8,0.000032226035,1.13559864e-7,6.0107163e-7,0.064882964,0.93490833,0.00010256535],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8335145,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99663335,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.48781815,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00024554454,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.010286561,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9953242},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4417470430","doi":"10.1109/mts.2025.3626891","title":"Evidence, Austerity, and the Public Good","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"IEEE Technology and Society Magazine","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Concordia University","funders":"","keywords":"","score_opus":0.034818587625716955,"score_gpt":0.3306977564141749,"score_spread":0.295879168788458,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4417470430","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.27560893,0.1083055,0.0030002755,0.57264435,0.002875534,0.0014658261,0.000015556127,0.00072381867,0.03536023],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9257215,0.05421342,0.00061600783,0.0023787392,0.000111702575,0.00005588399,3.5191252e-7,0.000012437924,0.01688992],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9973012,0.00029338937,0.0005330341,0.0007732068,0.0004072046,0.00069197215],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99708635,0.0016362942,0.00023807166,0.00058279285,0.0003580773,0.00009839599],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.003181908,0.00033228716,0.0006042154,0.00026857323,0.0023417452,0.000512764,0.0010344055,0.0011260562,0.00011318204],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0016945485,0.000248454,0.00017997736,0.003890005,0.011964621,0.00052445254,0.00082433433,0.0010161749,0.00006000874],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007821979,0.0000997296,0.003854318,0.00023773339,0.00028183957,0.000006925489,0.0043125483,3.709897e-7,0.00017375211,0.7909757,0.044926446,0.15505245],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0032358877,0.00016804635,0.004910925,0.0008603644,0.00043199837,0.00004399451,0.012522483,0.00047645107,0.0001483198,0.44436055,0.5322421,0.00059884996],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000014548689,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00016244946,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6501126,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006748531,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00044647127,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999968},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4417477035","doi":"10.1017/9781009608282","title":"Justice for Some","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Presumption of innocence; Criminal justice; Appeal; Adversarial system; Prejudice (legal term); Economic Justice","score_opus":0.05822831274818309,"score_gpt":0.308847705133213,"score_spread":0.25061939238502995,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4417477035","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000005357183,0.000332526,0.0018263252,0.00009746052,0.0012477494,0.0007945904,0.00044951405,0.0002567045,0.99498975],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.000033169963,0.00020145824,0.00036885595,0.00029391027,0.0006690975,0.0000030316146,0.000040863375,0.00002574303,0.99836385],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9983028,0.00010627437,0.00017806324,0.0005446611,0.00044441,0.00042378463],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.997804,0.00094386673,0.00022266501,0.00041726057,0.00044526721,0.00016696611],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003602799,0.00025933597,0.00038577185,0.00026053813,0.0009895113,0.00012423166,0.0011761935,0.00044683696,0.0000040466543],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00038368942,0.0003327805,0.0002393045,0.000031982123,0.00041952677,0.00017358045,0.0003086069,0.00033028534,0.000014545451],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000037796024,0.0000050046547,5.3270657e-8,0.00019770405,0.00003248879,0.000021944488,0.00010113425,8.9592623e-7,4.6411205e-7,0.5388835,0.45795676,0.0027622061],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00035478637,0.00002032833,0.0000011649554,0.00024122912,0.00056534476,4.9639107e-7,0.0003074135,0.0000058564215,0.00002376893,0.00033931228,0.99781156,0.00032871487],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001225811,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000016513193,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5398548,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00060307386,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0027239565,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99991244},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6886062561","doi":"10.14288/1.0370699","title":"An Act To Amend the manner of taking the Verdict of a Jury in Civil Cases. Whereas, much delay and expense in the administration of Justice has been occasioned by the rule of law, that in the trial of a Civil Action, the Jury must be unanimous in their verdict, ...","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Open Collections","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Verdict; Hung jury; Economic Justice; Administration (probate law); Administration of justice","score_opus":0.13456810958554966,"score_gpt":0.3985892531523523,"score_spread":0.2640211435668026,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6886062561","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9683928,0.00014543676,0.000032020427,0.005514321,0.00019809036,0.0027475688,0.00012977062,0.000005613475,0.022834381],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99896985,0.000096491414,0.000026087915,0.0003094593,0.00006713536,0.0002469032,0.00000369112,0.00001352728,0.0002668588],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99573857,0.0022422513,0.0007672074,0.00028766625,0.000704422,0.00025989578],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99405915,0.00426071,0.0007055628,0.00070018985,0.00024343136,0.00003096378],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0059484513,0.0001767188,0.00037537527,0.0001460844,0.0015051825,0.0003029238,0.0015713478,0.00012404594,0.0001269748],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011740787,0.00008008548,0.000081292885,0.0027722653,0.0012196329,0.00036085962,0.00018661957,0.00033281403,3.1301e-7],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.03246296,0.00510853,0.0017581977,0.00014137442,0.00023928993,0.000026933038,0.85173845,0.0007367682,0.0035136447,0.009898069,0.07676729,0.017608464],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.012257916,0.0035984186,0.040964838,0.0006084364,0.00043282614,0.00010704145,0.88022727,0.00046266228,0.006077869,0.0070568817,0.0476926,0.0005132651],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06673275,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.69329596,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6265632,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000093305935,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00081113423,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997947},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6926328509","doi":"10.25316/ir-11177","title":"The Nanaimo Free Press [Wednesday, July 12, 1876]","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"VIUSpace (Vancouver Island University Library)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"White (mutation); Kingdom; Volcano; Winch; Mountaineering","score_opus":0.012967751150016828,"score_gpt":0.22759000668742588,"score_spread":0.21462225553740905,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6926328509","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0000034104587,0.0011784307,0.00010389963,0.0017407516,0.005854822,0.00061637943,0.00025519714,0.00068647845,0.9895606],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.00013116743,0.0040209927,0.00029289324,0.00016545542,0.0006382879,0.0000013379621,0.0000036935219,0.00026254382,0.99448365],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9972137,0.00035183982,0.00017264043,0.0006635088,0.0009217372,0.00067653105],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9975684,0.00054777093,0.00040852433,0.0012006523,0.000056050107,0.00021855133],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00017258825,0.00041029026,0.0004411786,0.0002876814,0.0009483496,0.00038003302,0.003010101,0.0006343014,0.0011367238],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00016612353,0.0003327891,0.00021699083,0.0005542491,0.0005691702,0.00080984,0.0008269704,0.0005023219,0.00055466016],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000059290043,0.000031136206,0.00002109705,0.000041535666,0.00008802341,0.000049037673,0.0010068356,0.0000044937187,1.5553582e-7,0.0065932837,0.9909076,0.0011974912],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006324023,0.000033492433,0.0000146056045,0.00017420549,0.00006933626,3.1500272e-7,0.0019111171,0.0000029535736,0.0000049363425,0.00070637115,0.9959727,0.00047754374],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0028077476,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7002377,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.69742996,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009614852,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007822354,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99991244},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6944237953","doi":"10.17605/osf.io/zju8c","title":"Drawing the Line Between Lay and Expert Opinion Evidence","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Open Science Framework","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Scrutiny; Expert opinion; Public opinion; Unconscious mind; Set (abstract data type); Scientific evidence; Expert witness; Opinion leadership","score_opus":0.2591942790298678,"score_gpt":0.5373672280779959,"score_spread":0.27817294904812806,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6944237953","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.4782982,0.007898282,0.038918678,0.32388934,0.009094286,0.0033358228,0.0000110334695,0.00027270202,0.13828166],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9844306,0.000827113,0.012602314,0.0007838114,0.00071419164,0.000018175795,9.915281e-8,0.0000070724677,0.00061658275],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99763983,0.00012479414,0.00019121786,0.00053672364,0.0010621033,0.00044531253],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99643487,0.0017125506,0.00023634889,0.0011950522,0.00022320742,0.00019797863],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts","scholarly_communication","open_science"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0075214077,0.00010650392,0.00016768821,0.000053397416,0.010297711,0.00807761,0.008415914,0.00010540357,0.00010647479],"category_scores_gemma":[0.027339961,0.00007168945,0.000024960176,0.000540885,0.0037331018,0.0036587787,0.0023731315,0.00029100612,0.0000693414],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001573966,0.000020771755,0.05785962,0.000005874705,0.0000057667153,0.0000035086684,0.028548189,0.000008350006,0.00017300896,0.06828459,0.0020870941,0.8429875],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00017173919,0.00009859995,0.2613112,0.0020244198,0.000009269329,0.0000026261241,0.0076224874,0.00009126186,0.00085482816,0.15100445,0.57626116,0.0005479735],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0013171299,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00014807117,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.84243953,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000055722743,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00063189416,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99897814},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6958002514","doi":"10.6084/m9.figshare.13152994.v1","title":"Additional file 2 of Revisiting the hypothesis of syndromic frailty: a cross-sectional study of the structural validity of the frailty phenotype","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Figshare","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Université de Sherbrooke; Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal; McGill University; Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal; Université de Montréal; Montreal General Hospital; Jewish General Hospital","funders":"","keywords":"Statistical analysis; Phenotype; Structural variation; Statistical hypothesis testing; Identification (biology)","score_opus":0.2063926675444344,"score_gpt":0.3586741391146683,"score_spread":0.1522814715702339,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6958002514","genre_codex":"dataset","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.16770492,0.000018687571,1.279967e-7,0.00013511436,0.000046211513,0.00030547281,0.8305207,0.000010942848,0.0012578476],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99493504,2.567419e-7,0.000086038985,0.00006901464,0.00019844148,0.000037209767,0.0045288634,0.000009701838,0.00013545508],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978703,0.00033173416,0.00045296137,0.00019360316,0.0010189696,0.00013242393],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99310064,0.0051761107,0.00084567955,0.00030677475,0.0005392616,0.000031559193],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00017676756,0.00010078193,0.00022413232,0.000019690442,0.00039769078,0.000031344574,0.0011112822,0.00007554882,0.83825886],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03009871,0.00005639054,0.00018952883,0.0006252599,0.00016122834,0.00010828168,0.00032278633,0.0001908694,0.000035596844],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000037294874,0.00005598951,0.0054898695,0.00023631341,0.00007675123,5.254214e-7,0.0049162777,0.00034837535,0.000054880227,0.00007560453,0.98582447,0.0028836364],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014391645,0.000053804408,0.9456447,0.00067957223,0.00001756823,0.0000010546757,0.0014572792,0.00006284566,0.00027885684,0.00068913016,0.05088404,0.00008727165],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00005853621,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00007247853,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9401548,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000026132157,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00040008544,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.97807115},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6980400367","doi":"","title":"The Canadian Criminal Jury","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Chicago-Kent law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Publicity; Jury selection; Criminal trial; Hung jury; Verdict; Fair trial; Ethnic group","score_opus":0.13326510903697655,"score_gpt":0.37013352723093185,"score_spread":0.2368684181939553,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6980400367","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00039605726,0.13540502,0.00001025883,0.009245677,0.0007559271,0.00055158185,0.000005182884,0.00008222061,0.85354805],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.71558684,0.24880052,0.0007808103,0.028660892,0.000515911,0.00013128643,0.0000054419097,0.000043754957,0.0054745562],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99822134,0.00025589898,0.00030680688,0.00023947627,0.00049172755,0.00048474912],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987352,0.00017368043,0.000114205024,0.00043266054,0.00018433301,0.00035991002],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0018675986,0.00012508273,0.00020962178,0.000025957383,0.0020500466,0.00013422035,0.00088689657,0.00007593254,0.0013798776],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00075008423,0.00008218773,0.00011304009,0.00033654427,0.0005565183,0.00013736868,0.000054275944,0.00020746661,0.0009876308],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000018552471,0.000013118342,0.000045193836,0.0001665497,0.000007986895,0.000009681725,0.00087691756,1.12765095e-8,1.7998514e-7,0.85200536,0.021699939,0.12517318],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000027232169,0.000012086373,0.0009354834,0.0006441033,0.000051447652,0.0000030388364,0.000092592614,1.1895667e-7,0.0000053599533,0.007486093,0.9906247,0.00011774494],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.09625094,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7418996,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96892476,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00013098384,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007980331,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997902},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6982641920","doi":"","title":"Italia Victory Party on St. Clare Ave. in Toronto Ontario Canada","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Victory; Government (linguistics); Battle; Population","score_opus":0.007864507151473589,"score_gpt":0.21904590951393996,"score_spread":0.21118140236246638,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6982641920","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00010180426,0.00032631675,6.560971e-8,0.00016344419,0.000694599,0.0004004746,0.00017400256,0.00009680078,0.99804246],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0030492006,0.00007801369,0.00016427226,0.00043471542,0.00019879929,0.00001469776,0.00013670513,0.00007703019,0.99584657],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9974097,0.00013255511,0.000657803,0.0002595126,0.001108135,0.0004323096],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986536,0.00018015197,0.00053721626,0.00033616976,0.00015482178,0.0001380264],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.000359253,0.0003217485,0.00042823696,0.000058592897,0.00012635182,0.00007650979,0.0005233277,0.0004836563,0.4698884],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00020435108,0.00033327984,0.00009209067,0.000012265829,0.00013028212,5.3674336e-7,0.000057993893,0.0003231031,0.0010724578],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000036493344,0.000036024187,0.000029106355,0.0001018822,0.00001531215,0.000033099892,0.00072235253,0.000114854905,5.4746985e-9,0.00013506628,0.9975722,0.0012036489],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002726895,0.000045280656,0.00015417012,0.00030905934,0.000014513055,0.0000025105148,0.0007967955,5.7763344e-7,4.2994358e-7,0.000019447953,0.99803615,0.00034838068],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.99863833,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9999773,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.46881592,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0020901505,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011147107,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999119},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6989381400","doi":"","title":"The Avoidance of Stereotypical Reasoning in Rendering Judgment","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Lincoln (University of Nebraska)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Credibility; Rendering (computer graphics); Common sense; Trustworthiness; Nova scotia; Protocol analysis","score_opus":0.02146672152930987,"score_gpt":0.2811256263596552,"score_spread":0.2596589048303453,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6989381400","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97177935,0.00070624676,0.0014022653,0.0033035052,0.00018844954,0.0001027492,0.000003742397,0.000023625798,0.02249005],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.992744,0.00029144515,0.003969107,0.000023846498,0.000025438152,1.4026323e-7,5.489681e-7,0.0000034589214,0.0029419716],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99899673,0.00016525367,0.00012507914,0.00016671291,0.00037556243,0.00017066146],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99903816,0.00045103038,0.00013262646,0.00017941163,0.00015160936,0.000047155856],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005801779,0.000051255953,0.00014898258,0.000055846704,0.0003461899,0.000019170495,0.00037037345,0.000063964326,0.000091491645],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004581243,0.000055216187,0.000057464364,0.00056944636,0.00025292422,0.00014595946,0.00017311452,0.00012239031,0.000006465729],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0005735589,0.00061306206,0.105276294,0.00022909332,0.00013587513,0.0003799,0.0885894,0.0012424699,0.00262673,0.31489855,0.003529497,0.48190555],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0018180442,0.000118242904,0.4331359,0.0009213321,0.00004784718,0.0000054958773,0.23995334,0.0007055442,0.0015879528,0.01606457,0.3051818,0.00045994876],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00040506478,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.012551925,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4814456,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007489459,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003214056,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7004269},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6990944057","doi":"","title":"Evidence: A Canadian Casebook, 3rd Edition","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Casebook; Supreme court; Credibility; Reinterpretation; Civil procedure; Section (typography); Common law; Statute","score_opus":0.09034395919509426,"score_gpt":0.3263092198703376,"score_spread":0.23596526067524337,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6990944057","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.17050624,0.0013610502,0.00017446517,0.0025517128,0.0028330493,0.0006104259,0.000036671307,0.0003932864,0.8215331],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98988,0.00011017737,0.001296042,0.0020391268,0.0008279203,0.00003653895,0.0000028856418,0.000019642244,0.0057876585],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9980372,0.00019276321,0.00024314926,0.00035069254,0.00059318746,0.0005830144],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983149,0.00021043708,0.00009231784,0.0003437516,0.00026783504,0.000770726],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010692071,0.00013939507,0.00015775835,0.00013198347,0.0009737418,0.0002016827,0.0005586259,0.00018096494,0.010592049],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0015578748,0.00014307551,0.000071509785,0.0004060065,0.00030800383,0.00090475223,0.000043175794,0.0002507412,0.003104271],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000092192975,0.00009555486,0.01039848,0.000049522183,0.000042340504,0.0004654217,0.018385619,0.000003804355,0.000085009444,0.76322395,0.16300258,0.04415553],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00019246436,0.00007678649,0.00932753,0.00028813834,0.000031205323,0.000009428932,0.002190141,0.0000039403567,0.0006179926,0.044364676,0.94246525,0.00043247116],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.60426164,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8965551,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8193738,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00031632648,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012972568,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9976719},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6991061958","doi":"","title":"Expert evidence or expert decisions? Measuring the impact of expert evidence on criminal proceedings outcomes in the Provincial Court of Manitoba","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"Mspace (University of Manitoba)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Injustice; Expert witness; Criminal justice; Knowledge base; Expert system; Subject-matter expert","score_opus":0.14181449861575163,"score_gpt":0.3718808477960686,"score_spread":0.230066349180317,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6991061958","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99223644,0.0026848833,0.00005803529,0.002008,0.00042845105,0.001036583,0.000014975484,0.000037496528,0.0014951391],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99409425,0.0042113746,0.00087552296,0.00009025536,0.00017799842,0.000010577638,0.0000063524035,0.000034794568,0.0004988528],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99490786,0.00046609418,0.0005188252,0.0006934626,0.0029075474,0.00050619757],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99264365,0.0038435457,0.001149633,0.0006301996,0.0016196521,0.00011334293],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022574654,0.0004523937,0.0009388495,0.0005019567,0.0007998322,0.00014716556,0.003053047,0.00040734303,0.00006283394],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008461004,0.00031822195,0.0005061671,0.0012986996,0.0005509335,0.0010318332,0.00023562438,0.0005794375,0.000008611614],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.014281887,0.0028035701,0.1140607,0.0014542372,0.00076812366,0.00042808717,0.74176204,0.00016326085,0.009912227,0.0030010792,0.05426102,0.057103783],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00037155562,0.00044392952,0.26338014,0.006696822,0.00008925357,0.000005027744,0.7269151,0.00001948218,0.0008473127,0.00012990182,0.00073690154,0.00036458578],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.057661474,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.60167605,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5440146,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006507367,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00196507,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999927},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6992132915","doi":"","title":"Justice Institute of British Columbia catalogue 2005","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Arca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Economic Justice; Government (linguistics); Work (physics)","score_opus":0.013506906700544568,"score_gpt":0.2494120448052702,"score_spread":0.23590513810472563,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6992132915","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.32608286,0.033294875,0.00022859657,0.002613235,0.006158727,0.0033991942,0.0009778761,0.0026326997,0.624612],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9515432,0.0070302105,0.0022079754,0.0011921226,0.0015498643,0.00008660388,0.0002581705,0.00010361372,0.03602823],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9947567,0.00025670265,0.00086234877,0.0009070643,0.0009886291,0.0022285383],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981901,0.00025721142,0.0003951979,0.0005427482,0.00017268125,0.00044208547],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008085237,0.00018901685,0.00062797614,0.00004487529,0.0014034405,0.0033157133,0.0014844389,0.00037121834,0.03361679],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00030570128,0.00051484106,0.00023006195,0.00182665,0.001021166,0.0032799495,0.00034046988,0.00071824866,0.00006805114],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002540665,0.00047497457,0.00470524,0.00012479654,0.000123173,0.00039307587,0.00028602695,0.0011550278,0.0000011136309,0.050016385,0.8585142,0.08418057],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009164811,0.00016021582,0.0022091584,0.00049443846,0.00009498501,0.00014707602,0.00015373806,0.000009739638,0.0000020909288,0.43462816,0.56069577,0.00048813963],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.39634767,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9825758,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6254604,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00030231345,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0044377255,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998966},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6992500644","doi":"","title":"Legal Researchers Across Canada Delve Into Stanley Trial","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Government (linguistics); Legislation; Action (physics); Work (physics)","score_opus":0.0570749436459662,"score_gpt":0.38899137968267405,"score_spread":0.33191643603670784,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6992500644","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.86801517,0.0003087427,0.0001352083,0.004298738,0.0030647279,0.00064799044,0.000043365064,0.00019381785,0.12329225],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9835876,0.00002370988,0.0010088288,0.0014734181,0.0023053684,0.00003058299,0.0000038240823,0.000029028652,0.011537592],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99587536,0.00041908855,0.00037910396,0.0005062858,0.0018490081,0.0009711364],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99758023,0.00049477647,0.00012441265,0.00048968935,0.00067691214,0.0006339801],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0026343812,0.00017741504,0.00025257317,0.000031325584,0.0019951314,0.00068456354,0.0010899757,0.00017674392,0.001566715],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0043043513,0.00017223033,0.00007469258,0.00075260206,0.0010813165,0.00065542536,0.00022666363,0.0004456908,0.00049124326],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.017419368,0.00029304143,0.0017388149,0.00006852798,0.00017274942,0.00031579097,0.023001434,0.000027126101,0.00021828768,0.37702373,0.50018746,0.07953367],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0032565347,0.0001601411,0.00016006295,0.000026612439,0.000005701165,9.1495804e-7,0.0043593924,0.000004282162,0.00039812186,0.004662691,0.9867316,0.00023393454],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.939871,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9977227,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.48654416,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0007990583,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0039460007,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999346},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6995884034","doi":"","title":"The privilege of silence and the persistent risk of self-incrimination: Part I","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Queensland's institutional digital repository (The University of Queensland)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Circumstantial evidence; Silence; Privilege (computing); Criminal law; Natural (archaeology); Wrongdoing; Leading question","score_opus":0.01079996145271058,"score_gpt":0.2205649080998394,"score_spread":0.2097649466471288,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6995884034","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9189612,0.0011320141,0.000882353,0.0017134374,0.00038185922,0.00047128735,0.000074214106,0.000044681397,0.07633891],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99828553,0.0007065958,0.00014466124,0.000013586612,0.00007087702,7.424587e-7,0.0000027145309,0.000003774186,0.00077150436],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99836016,0.00020427108,0.00029968098,0.0001970941,0.00076914835,0.00016965071],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977242,0.0010194017,0.00041161192,0.0002800231,0.0005017518,0.00006303406],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.000713117,0.000118218,0.00021620262,0.000050361683,0.0017555029,0.000064223146,0.00058698456,0.00008082692,0.0000063127763],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00058647775,0.00007046729,0.00020058303,0.00023285691,0.0043542855,0.0003685413,0.00014033023,0.00015832228,0.0000043051195],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0014581371,0.00046658533,0.048199065,0.00017286224,0.0007682985,0.000045818968,0.05124643,0.0056465263,0.00004126169,0.8786445,0.0014033068,0.011907205],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.010767433,0.0008848941,0.31934053,0.0014086433,0.0015065944,0.00023729325,0.09851775,0.00055280863,0.0012774032,0.058794424,0.50560445,0.0011077556],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00120868,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00036344634,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8198501,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009467475,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006109921,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995441},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6996292586","doi":"","title":"The Relevance of Evidence: A Canadian Perspective","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Perspective (graphical); Relevance (law); Focus (optics); Government (linguistics); Context (archaeology)","score_opus":0.057717985468702694,"score_gpt":0.35737586480597583,"score_spread":0.2996578793372731,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6996292586","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.118200555,0.05463682,0.00013910024,0.10085047,0.00274158,0.00072498457,0.00004666613,0.00020322946,0.7224566],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98347396,0.0013286043,0.00061092584,0.0008381711,0.00022426347,0.000012713764,3.8611108e-7,0.00001083942,0.013500168],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.998245,0.00027982,0.00020548247,0.0002763495,0.00060610677,0.00038723054],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99682295,0.001380118,0.000097030126,0.0003935803,0.0010200324,0.00028626353],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010600934,0.00008609247,0.00014083067,0.000033576758,0.0011210814,0.00021009137,0.00054861436,0.0000838747,0.0005487201],"category_scores_gemma":[0.013490144,0.00006292529,0.00007381234,0.0007153716,0.00047557597,0.000333613,0.000056772235,0.00022143463,0.00022361163],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000017159718,0.000013987578,0.0008949183,0.000007652643,0.00001914548,0.00003678044,0.0044603674,0.000013126999,0.000082312734,0.9800709,0.009179839,0.0052038184],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000085563624,0.000018887164,0.0021485006,0.00016043798,0.000012552155,0.0000030682256,0.017848779,0.0000026933478,0.0008662919,0.087097585,0.89162123,0.0001344297],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3232539,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9323164,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8929733,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003885293,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0031881742,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99481964},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6997033630","doi":"","title":"Terrorism Sentencing Decisions in Canada Since 2001: Shifting away from the Fundamental Principle and towards Cognitive Biases","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Cognitive bias; Cognition; Terrorism; Motivated reasoning; Context (archaeology); Perception","score_opus":0.04453939324808394,"score_gpt":0.32204869576446293,"score_spread":0.277509302516379,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6997033630","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99090993,0.000620246,0.000034127672,0.0015620417,0.0005846481,0.0004049151,0.00011460717,0.000038098686,0.005731388],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.996992,0.00010774735,0.0004649831,0.0017873605,0.00018219778,0.000015882182,0.000012069392,0.000018560342,0.00041919743],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9974893,0.00027260307,0.0003647567,0.0004781504,0.00085344963,0.00054177374],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9951503,0.0040814243,0.00015596696,0.00025170427,0.000123845,0.00023671247],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008748448,0.00018202177,0.00025663545,0.000045010744,0.0006665325,0.00028065348,0.0004634057,0.00008027113,0.0005602333],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004701234,0.00014532471,0.00004226952,0.00043505995,0.00018777138,0.00045845003,0.00026925805,0.00036681103,0.00010129745],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013573373,0.00009880198,0.9309797,0.0000112687785,0.000063846535,0.00013655837,0.011830223,0.00013833582,0.00026270756,0.004648568,0.0021648908,0.04952935],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0017087595,0.00007006128,0.71681136,0.0021245948,0.00005186779,0.000008305913,0.16088895,0.00035868707,0.0007296362,0.0035497367,0.112840325,0.0008577047],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9613612,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99444026,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.21416835,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005666795,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0021584504,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6134162},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W6999428453","doi":"","title":"Courts need new ideas to safely resume jury trials, selection, lawyers say","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Hung jury; Jury selection; Jury trial; Fair trial","score_opus":0.06139978204581782,"score_gpt":0.35000204511526173,"score_spread":0.2886022630694439,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W6999428453","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.19677614,0.0038581088,0.015416942,0.43365481,0.008130649,0.0051652826,0.00015086646,0.004337827,0.33250937],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9275562,0.00013326069,0.008635498,0.03273512,0.0051646205,0.000044899054,0.000011009023,0.00008856919,0.025630808],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99579126,0.0007622705,0.000804542,0.00071529264,0.0012366427,0.0006900054],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9967648,0.00080938626,0.00028901245,0.00032061726,0.00036795487,0.0014482741],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.002799091,0.0002800315,0.0006319566,0.00011560889,0.0009005073,0.00059836375,0.0008479428,0.00024843696,0.0024266667],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012163084,0.00027713846,0.00020645057,0.001526109,0.00014308572,0.00061793905,0.00013488422,0.00042890952,0.0032670822],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006002656,0.0000499265,0.0005694692,0.000023211027,0.00007134569,0.00002081763,0.0045355656,0.0003304312,0.0009196853,0.15001088,0.82395655,0.01891184],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006605018,0.00011513257,0.0009521446,0.00004930772,0.00004753399,0.0000016894202,0.00080921745,0.000008628641,0.00078526686,0.014386458,0.9818207,0.00036341706],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004473104,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0076602916,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.73078007,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00021369294,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013381306,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99996805},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7000452601","doi":"","title":"Expert opinion: United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Figshare","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Witness; Expert system; Legislation; Forensic psychology","score_opus":0.20554355877408184,"score_gpt":0.4114702834090533,"score_spread":0.20592672463497144,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7000452601","genre_codex":"dataset","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.24273258,0.010921932,0.00002041296,0.10114677,0.006746156,0.004486676,0.38766414,0.0032555342,0.24302581],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9916582,0.000009481743,0.00011180629,0.0020129608,0.00035314637,0.000011170043,0.0040560937,0.000006129997,0.0017810083],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9991725,0.000037755533,0.000095252566,0.00015629527,0.00032681777,0.00021139497],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994824,0.00012068656,0.000044886572,0.0001054733,0.00011798588,0.00012855856],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00005139027,0.000072644856,0.00007663142,0.000048870093,0.00025673994,0.00010415389,0.00020779428,0.00006406124,0.06554253],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0013188659,0.00007072985,0.000013464445,0.00034630994,0.000010359987,0.00012498362,0.000024784496,0.000076049844,0.00013377004],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000019282243,0.000004529544,0.000037347414,0.0000042875636,0.000001391519,0.000008627876,0.00043514615,0.0000017957673,0.0000019532122,0.00070103595,0.9932074,0.005594558],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000061073595,0.000011075255,0.012511831,0.00023241699,4.4330153e-7,0.0000013931764,0.00013643457,0.000002613081,0.000028216034,0.00020751018,0.9867057,0.00010125893],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.22011362,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.38363156,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7489256,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006194141,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00033593748,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9353117},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7007512459","doi":"","title":"Access to justice in Canada: A noteworthy experience","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Scientific Issues of Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University Series pedagogy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Economic Justice; Government (linguistics); Dialog box; De facto; Procedural justice; Public policy; Public access","score_opus":0.1926170576590088,"score_gpt":0.4431881411343172,"score_spread":0.25057108347530843,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7007512459","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.95595133,0.000060999213,0.00008712005,0.028021976,0.0013647428,0.00041452196,0.000108975735,0.00010877288,0.013881541],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.95079213,0.00007361775,0.00021388207,0.00030653333,0.00013314164,0.000004901293,0.000018646248,0.000009518558,0.048447613],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99574506,0.00031463095,0.00037370884,0.00059081364,0.0024000367,0.0005757605],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99736094,0.0008884858,0.00018637127,0.00034100903,0.0010283169,0.00019489443],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016486606,0.0001794874,0.00028963765,0.0006082396,0.0011806239,0.00024115498,0.002553178,0.000091702685,0.00067027553],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0028073392,0.00015998466,0.000069607806,0.0039503146,0.0010131602,0.000962676,0.0008188121,0.00021731525,0.00012099333],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0013830595,0.00047456453,0.052099656,0.00027230033,0.0001063628,0.00059461885,0.2715186,0.021314964,0.0011191227,0.46762568,0.16169669,0.021794412],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00030070878,0.000047533566,0.08477622,0.000052901585,0.000020255444,0.0000030699903,0.11305689,0.00019874609,0.00022695455,0.0043567126,0.7966166,0.0003434004],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3801804,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.91580874,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.63491994,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0007346536,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004217142,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9080524},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7011114152","doi":"","title":"&lt;i&gt;R v Chouhan&lt;/i&gt;","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Constitutionality; Jury selection; Appeal; Jurisdiction; Hung jury","score_opus":0.031796621580239146,"score_gpt":0.3002517652949765,"score_spread":0.26845514371473733,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7011114152","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.14172502,0.004864098,0.0013548216,0.030383151,0.0022420345,0.00091911096,0.00006167293,0.0017200018,0.8167301],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97663337,0.00024766047,0.002549628,0.00812409,0.0019010444,0.000035751073,0.000007790722,0.00005810598,0.010442589],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9965483,0.0002755678,0.0004555588,0.00069785304,0.0012704387,0.00075228355],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99788934,0.0003514048,0.00018517004,0.00046278664,0.00026381307,0.0008474707],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00083939935,0.00027207824,0.00038164662,0.00006810499,0.0009439615,0.0004872224,0.0012015911,0.0002500524,0.004128393],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022984229,0.00027391769,0.00017593148,0.0010374616,0.00043167343,0.00073179207,0.00023035367,0.0003734187,0.0070683626],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000108865286,0.0001255839,0.00074647705,0.00006523257,0.000058636004,0.00009123768,0.005542191,0.00007213733,0.004911531,0.76669586,0.20363097,0.01795129],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00036827507,0.00006267577,0.0007756075,0.000041682797,0.000022863525,0.0000015733624,0.00025122572,0.000021542744,0.00064988295,0.00764209,0.98980564,0.00035692472],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00017153923,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00318266,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8349083,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012132422,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00043351328,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99997133},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7011184272","doi":"","title":"&lt;i&gt;R v Bhogal&lt;/i&gt;","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Jury; Task (project management); Work (physics); Selection (genetic algorithm)","score_opus":0.024611605139553336,"score_gpt":0.30308296382583744,"score_spread":0.2784713586862841,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7011184272","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.13798605,0.006813764,0.0005344598,0.0067054653,0.002834122,0.00035777976,0.00004043855,0.0007176586,0.8440103],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9179856,0.00047085542,0.004045584,0.0029669753,0.0012635121,0.000034663164,0.00001528036,0.000054179185,0.07316333],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.996388,0.00039069285,0.00044393836,0.0006994043,0.0013015725,0.00077634555],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99754536,0.0004975071,0.00016087612,0.00071646704,0.0005698107,0.0005099586],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011290862,0.00024996235,0.00036497737,0.00008473011,0.0011114038,0.000593952,0.0008423361,0.00026630063,0.0071002548],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002513391,0.00026216955,0.00019255184,0.001093992,0.0004184255,0.0006856903,0.00025051137,0.00034001903,0.004780901],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000029798643,0.00016310869,0.00052936893,0.00003413699,0.000046658843,0.00022420503,0.0014802428,0.00003132735,0.0050559454,0.8861016,0.09281205,0.013491542],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00032708328,0.000023947956,0.0014958705,0.0000687468,0.000025842659,0.00000809689,0.00034647665,0.0000051740667,0.001766676,0.021303417,0.9742891,0.0003395263],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00018686747,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0141800465,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8814771,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00017849423,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009331353,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999831},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7014535724","doi":"","title":"Peters featured in multiple national and international media outlets","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Public opinion; News media; Media event","score_opus":0.03898491236612972,"score_gpt":0.31893326483019463,"score_spread":0.2799483524640649,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7014535724","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.839632,0.0010644456,0.000058875183,0.016049406,0.004166399,0.0004747703,0.00020581958,0.00021500667,0.1381333],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9944887,0.000024687715,0.000955176,0.0013326765,0.00023191918,0.0000449803,0.000022469358,0.000010068268,0.0028893335],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982351,0.00016112615,0.00017782058,0.00026855723,0.0009498412,0.000207528],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991487,0.0004776547,0.00007092654,0.000084025,0.00010753543,0.000111142734],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00090345356,0.00008268381,0.00010437342,0.00013194587,0.00048957596,0.00013525214,0.00040245423,0.00004777358,0.0019979815],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0018322875,0.00009200656,0.000032242147,0.00029659638,0.00012275315,0.0002970311,0.00019400446,0.0002848001,0.00007324603],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0004930305,0.0005206356,0.1111589,0.000025977288,0.000089162786,0.00014774666,0.031050097,0.0013691763,0.0005422869,0.71995765,0.10814119,0.026504148],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009393191,0.000018037388,0.044883963,0.000015031292,0.0000035284545,0.0000065733607,0.003368501,0.00012590249,0.000028681292,0.021994065,0.92839867,0.0002177545],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006388707,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009502592,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8202574,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002496085,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00020301163,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989143},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7017550639","doi":"","title":"Assessing Credibility:The Impact of a Motive to Lie and the Embellishmentof Evidence — the Canadian Approach","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Lincoln (University of Nebraska)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Credibility; Witness; Appeal; Supreme court; Set (abstract data type); Subject (documents); Forensic psychology","score_opus":0.08612035338318644,"score_gpt":0.3588049195301485,"score_spread":0.272684566146962,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7017550639","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9698221,0.00042985656,0.00042033248,0.015687527,0.00008382547,0.0007602459,0.000030956937,0.000015105486,0.012750034],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99834025,0.000029710181,0.0005948677,0.0001534344,0.000033707307,0.000002068068,8.426501e-7,0.0000045553966,0.00084058556],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.997927,0.00078842836,0.00012131113,0.00024068911,0.0006838478,0.00023870819],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99755776,0.0015536342,0.00019760423,0.0003411361,0.00021324138,0.0001366256],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0032502091,0.00008450303,0.00018973672,0.00011899725,0.0031965128,0.0001341546,0.0011933794,0.000043118456,0.00021410327],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00090307096,0.00005577327,0.00011927882,0.001153344,0.0011456019,0.0003732874,0.00044733324,0.00025389376,0.0000023334946],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0009156277,0.0003607236,0.07530512,0.00009031768,0.00041969444,0.000028803635,0.75710213,0.016632942,0.000098355675,0.04695367,0.02461661,0.07747598],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009991905,0.00027490803,0.36913586,0.00009542318,0.00016322022,0.000008122403,0.58626294,0.0035223868,0.000009503332,0.0147303445,0.024491535,0.00030659893],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.39027795,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2123735,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.29383072,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00038298487,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0015904293,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9981012},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7017857224","doi":"","title":"A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PEOPLE'S PERCEPTION ABOUT LAW IN CANADA, JAPAN AND MEXICO","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Perception; Legislation; Government (linguistics); Perspective (graphical); Field (mathematics); Work (physics)","score_opus":0.040377927128305006,"score_gpt":0.34033373136717365,"score_spread":0.29995580423886864,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7017857224","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9890679,0.00031298024,0.00006877864,0.000088145105,0.0010035492,0.0003150221,0.00010089521,0.000019151892,0.009023576],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991963,0.00002522268,0.00032936575,0.000051869476,0.00026961934,0.00003168508,0.00003344487,0.0000047799763,0.000057704725],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9979594,0.00019792886,0.00037990545,0.00024631762,0.0009331742,0.0002832817],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99893755,0.00030030616,0.00015077711,0.00021296565,0.00024106957,0.00015734385],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005542626,0.00012994965,0.00026791298,0.000080851896,0.00064127985,0.00006199849,0.00020223462,0.000044470205,0.000040186504],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00032801565,0.0001261953,0.000017863682,0.0004361854,0.00037944625,0.0011552874,0.000120466735,0.00014967658,0.000004735045],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00011915004,0.0006185258,0.7575501,0.000041731375,0.00003833529,0.000016836824,0.071619056,0.00014388215,0.0003600866,0.16822425,0.00076422514,0.00050382176],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00048837677,0.000056578232,0.8947291,0.000114386174,0.000028389159,0.000016046148,0.08006679,0.00002116774,0.00018129183,0.00012170051,0.023952384,0.0002237999],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.92536175,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98639876,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.16810255,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00059498864,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0017044264,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5146095},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7017946700","doi":"","title":"Comment les juges détectent-ils les mensonges lors de procès? Étude des mécanismes communicationnels sous-jacents aux déclarations de culpabilité pour parjure","year":2020,"lang":"fr","type":"other","venue":"Open MIND","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Self evaluation; Determiner; Decision system","score_opus":0.15513081271122994,"score_gpt":0.4085167282507409,"score_spread":0.25338591553951095,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7017946700","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.39468256,0.024494616,0.0070055276,0.21175344,0.00077292026,0.008108207,0.0009038519,0.00015710147,0.35212177],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6263236,0.008902602,0.19427387,0.0017638638,0.00074881775,0.00064400904,0.00015077967,0.00044540013,0.16674706],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99455476,0.0016837663,0.00084451644,0.0009886229,0.00083263963,0.0010957017],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9958472,0.0014656578,0.00079079135,0.0009317388,0.00041214746,0.00055244454],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0017069557,0.00070475636,0.0008715942,0.00016921906,0.0023916396,0.0013490091,0.004214323,0.00076247327,0.022386257],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0021772014,0.0006971416,0.00023260301,0.00073748524,0.0017394332,0.00048252015,0.0012236559,0.00078529736,0.0012671942],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009284928,0.001500566,0.028461246,0.00035823148,0.000727433,0.00003468754,0.12390368,0.00041995785,0.0007436863,0.009174544,0.049402736,0.7851804],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005852543,0.00014615738,0.007338612,0.0011200381,0.0003451808,0.000010843337,0.044025328,0.00019256574,0.0014051077,0.006010466,0.93798524,0.000835209],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0032711956,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.033166505,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8885825,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009718153,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0022956221,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996877},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7018031886","doi":"","title":"Court Review: Journal of the American Judges Association, Vol. 55, No. 3","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Lincoln (University of Nebraska)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Set (abstract data type); Federal court; Court of record; Precedent; Supreme court","score_opus":0.008687133082190508,"score_gpt":0.26192452957494633,"score_spread":0.25323739649275584,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7018031886","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8811895,0.0028686486,0.00019456737,0.043413,0.002577599,0.0006339883,0.000028752012,0.00004964676,0.06904429],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.91087407,0.008855322,0.0024392488,0.0023198132,0.00051285105,1.7368637e-7,0.0000014268253,0.00001620951,0.07498089],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99833006,0.00027507637,0.00018073797,0.00012506635,0.00092026335,0.00016879626],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9961332,0.00043441384,0.0012506602,0.00020504744,0.0019049802,0.00007167035],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013468019,0.00006958334,0.0003202931,0.000083661245,0.00028743464,0.000020881977,0.00091094617,0.00005868427,0.0008809925],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022116203,0.000063598665,0.0001879254,0.0007918857,0.0002309718,0.00028842033,0.0001230994,0.0001869156,0.00030330993],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000045268185,0.00009681664,0.1918184,0.00012253449,0.00008757096,0.000004561476,0.0025293885,0.000016096708,0.000068181136,0.0010218504,0.7919248,0.012264547],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002550917,0.00005645179,0.10983847,0.00029268392,0.00006493775,8.1379767e-7,0.005581653,0.000007074597,0.000007881769,0.00052950863,0.8832726,0.00009282465],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00035538763,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0007298553,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09134783,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002998567,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00053195725,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.964625},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7018172971","doi":"","title":"Court Review: Volume 39, Issue 4 - Editor's Note","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Lincoln (University of Nebraska)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Subject (documents); Volume (thermodynamics); Action (physics); Poison control","score_opus":0.015089388200495225,"score_gpt":0.2929702621397785,"score_spread":0.2778808739392833,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7018172971","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.012782107,0.01906031,0.019566778,0.07693037,0.017281963,0.002220757,0.00014627718,0.0007673878,0.85124403],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.38508216,0.040899165,0.06613584,0.005713485,0.009444778,0.0000031430252,0.000032465086,0.00010783618,0.49258113],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99828076,0.00024030483,0.00015323938,0.0003016416,0.0007315154,0.0002925291],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987264,0.00020790262,0.00021453104,0.00029866767,0.00037577533,0.00017672511],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009428463,0.00011630702,0.00030078465,0.0001184064,0.000593614,0.000026103662,0.0006296144,0.00016228025,0.0028695415],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00086617185,0.00014928526,0.0001277112,0.0007565436,0.0003651837,0.0004054959,0.00008145705,0.00017057995,0.00075466395],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000012715801,0.00008163735,0.00050297537,0.00014468581,0.00001546509,0.000022993461,0.0016688626,0.000008497039,0.000020916174,0.004239263,0.98313046,0.01015154],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021140547,0.000035235633,0.0008893436,0.00025193542,0.00004187084,0.0000010670858,0.0031073592,0.000017103006,0.000009823023,0.0009091807,0.9943617,0.00016396015],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006435,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009553568,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.37230006,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00015138148,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005071252,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.998042},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7020026365","doi":"","title":"Justice is blind when it comes to Canadian jury selection","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury selection; Economic Justice; Jury; Selection (genetic algorithm)","score_opus":0.08012394694327196,"score_gpt":0.3610816076016219,"score_spread":0.28095766065834993,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7020026365","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.15085053,0.00068168266,0.00074106886,0.1099221,0.0043515707,0.0011023823,0.000081923055,0.0005169393,0.7317518],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9208725,0.000024167293,0.0045916033,0.029961806,0.0011635238,0.00003249739,0.000005592708,0.00003517357,0.043313105],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977715,0.00016382418,0.00025696625,0.00039742954,0.0007941572,0.00061610853],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99733347,0.00016335555,0.000075839125,0.00026853726,0.00064982247,0.0015089652],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011586908,0.00015807996,0.00019837549,0.00020083803,0.00083358743,0.00045653645,0.0005742232,0.00018597428,0.0017761139],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0020259235,0.00016696425,0.00005060025,0.0008140895,0.0001173585,0.00054262363,0.000061178565,0.00025707998,0.004407607],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00005684128,0.000029556033,0.0011797915,0.000014357266,0.000018872059,0.000012754314,0.0102640055,0.00006643465,0.000012735617,0.04328929,0.9365356,0.008519738],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002689308,0.000051242685,0.00037622455,0.000028855515,0.000035934827,0.0000025944698,0.0030687924,0.000012695906,0.000111490306,0.00868155,0.9871307,0.00023100922],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.33525702,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.89677465,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.770022,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006398735,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002260321,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9991364},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7020451177","doi":"","title":"L’authenticité dans le droit de la preuve civile québécois","year":2023,"lang":"fr","type":"dissertation","venue":"Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Context (archaeology); Subject (documents); ESPACE; Austrian School","score_opus":0.00857666493945542,"score_gpt":0.22062193059828225,"score_spread":0.21204526565882684,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7020451177","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.82888204,0.007640017,0.000787772,0.00044632258,0.0019867006,0.00040912916,0.00010180031,0.0003811607,0.15936507],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.72933626,0.0008838952,0.00044217298,0.00006746104,0.00029507707,0.000038518912,0.00016213443,0.000065636,0.26870888],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955661,0.0007218295,0.00056383066,0.0009117602,0.0013893476,0.00084709976],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99696213,0.0010152907,0.00060954323,0.00047533042,0.00041202072,0.0005256919],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009531422,0.0005354479,0.0005393062,0.00043686788,0.014311084,0.00021160663,0.0011635284,0.001009233,0.00010640258],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00057849975,0.00069249654,0.0004885961,0.0012592357,0.0013195866,0.00058509276,0.00025019018,0.00072283705,0.00041117592],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00041092976,0.0005080139,0.0131302215,0.00032560245,0.0005120193,0.0035768193,0.61667216,0.0033881748,0.0064559723,0.34018785,0.0016900805,0.013142158],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0012344235,0.00013623766,0.15383945,0.0010349144,0.00080422556,0.00048198857,0.58976054,0.0015057764,0.005737444,0.019122574,0.2248894,0.0014530044],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.59104097,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.48310298,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.32106528,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012136702,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009922157,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995526},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7028222256","doi":"","title":"Examination of Witnesses in Criminal Cases","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal investigation; Criminal law; Criminal procedure; Criminal case; Criminal code","score_opus":0.06118449243330677,"score_gpt":0.36072979958365864,"score_spread":0.2995453071503519,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7028222256","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.90807533,0.00022751796,0.000043847936,0.00036231003,0.0003110388,0.00012880997,0.000005381323,0.000035581194,0.0908102],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9973959,0.0000676265,0.0005851911,0.00007811927,0.00016013847,0.000012014347,0.0000013715741,0.000009661809,0.0016900088],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986196,0.0001503139,0.00025409125,0.00022894348,0.00050780165,0.00023924014],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986613,0.000358948,0.00025534676,0.00041137132,0.00022006399,0.00009300988],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010728284,0.000094067254,0.00018667824,0.0000875528,0.0006494429,0.00023369097,0.00065172184,0.00009573641,0.00038949848],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0045512994,0.00009419326,0.000039348222,0.00014277929,0.0005405349,0.00085198367,0.00009121954,0.00012437942,0.000080644844],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001386339,0.00040218787,0.053274494,0.00024444892,0.000020616495,0.00024699446,0.010720342,0.000047329275,0.0006950235,0.8038713,0.0014081392,0.12893054],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010587019,0.00017300833,0.8449337,0.0005423617,0.000052690237,0.000013082216,0.010065533,0.000017605214,0.008492549,0.027213298,0.10686189,0.0005756257],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008036704,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04099593,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7916592,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006094346,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00019144891,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9985689},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7029010404","doi":"","title":"How Libraries Help Make Your Data Management as Easy as Pie","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Scholars Archive - University at Albany (University at Albany, State University of New York)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Data management; Data management plan; Data sharing; Best practice; Work (physics); Data curation; Data as a service; Memorandum; Digital curation","score_opus":0.06162529821837197,"score_gpt":0.26223440030488293,"score_spread":0.20060910208651095,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7029010404","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5840433,0.0011542776,0.01375126,0.019907711,0.0011221534,0.0016110673,0.0037827601,0.00095400715,0.3736734],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.08279241,0.005801708,0.027281236,0.00037921604,0.00011534986,3.5862556e-8,0.0008844813,0.000074381394,0.8826712],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99340445,0.0011388488,0.00026622188,0.002020714,0.0018744377,0.0012953365],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9948054,0.00060802774,0.0006562061,0.002111537,0.0005316196,0.0012872309],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","open_science","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["open_science"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00072146766,0.00063775777,0.00084497186,0.0010780843,0.005419872,0.00040504662,0.005623127,0.00037906406,0.003065223],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000331188,0.00097352883,0.00048585577,0.0026072252,0.002132416,0.0044359863,0.010365006,0.00087013637,0.0007358561],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.010698633,0.0017611769,0.012616174,0.0006663884,0.0046516345,0.042311106,0.121797144,0.00058772333,0.0022954606,0.31516838,0.42433065,0.063115545],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0029518334,0.0001297831,0.005032737,0.0001707021,0.0004992516,0.00003805426,0.13166405,0.000048740585,0.00012045425,0.0060660257,0.852399,0.00087937346],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0059567364,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0390742,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.50899774,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014824648,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0020745522,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99975693},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7036379830","doi":"","title":"The Canadian constables' assistant: being the substance of a charge to the Grand Jury of the County of Simcoe, at the April sessions, 1852.","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"QSpace (Queen's University Library)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Charge (physics); Jury; Field (mathematics); Hung jury","score_opus":0.00873565896252496,"score_gpt":0.2151198313216904,"score_spread":0.20638417235916545,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7036379830","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.46907607,0.0003596746,0.00014275817,0.42560667,0.00058617874,0.0012569646,0.00038827918,0.00006362481,0.10251979],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9628212,0.000335772,0.000049431306,0.0006585957,0.000045401634,0.0000014633611,0.0000019252493,0.000014567599,0.036071636],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99730134,0.0009421941,0.00023989474,0.0002538872,0.0008284267,0.00043423416],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9958983,0.002416073,0.0004263802,0.0008856074,0.00022083003,0.00015282634],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011199552,0.00016600465,0.0002533928,0.00008310301,0.0039306087,0.000115456816,0.0023389482,0.0001141927,0.00014707563],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00055890507,0.00007682511,0.000153532,0.0014806374,0.0018367409,0.00041280178,0.00036582522,0.00028688516,0.0000083486],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00027930093,0.00006031433,0.047827583,0.000060380808,0.00012530897,0.000005843761,0.029478818,0.00016562863,0.00004088238,0.3413314,0.57773644,0.0028880902],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001769093,0.000019729336,0.015743129,0.00012557981,0.000048783513,1.5168342e-7,0.007814464,0.000005231783,0.0012899215,0.0013309648,0.9733249,0.00012022591],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06658701,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.37005928,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.49374515,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00014626421,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001329283,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99736613},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7038136769","doi":"","title":"History of St. John's United Methodist Church, Aiken","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Digital Commons - Wofford College (Wofford College)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Government (linguistics); Subject (documents); Feature (linguistics); Agency (philosophy)","score_opus":0.04995729389678383,"score_gpt":0.3245579038003788,"score_spread":0.27460060990359497,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7038136769","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.041785862,0.0044860225,0.0013807175,0.0031640278,0.00441287,0.001690131,0.008900727,0.0014014873,0.9327782],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8580081,0.00016335514,0.0016308803,0.0003262667,0.00035107622,0.00014825046,0.00030324832,0.00015791212,0.13891093],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99383134,0.00047231728,0.001385251,0.0010684591,0.0019880915,0.0012545588],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9943083,0.0027714858,0.0003970656,0.0011298055,0.0007836553,0.0006096721],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0018902373,0.0006995191,0.0010790225,0.0017545089,0.0007514912,0.00052341237,0.0020344837,0.0005000535,0.0011709887],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0015987338,0.0007079233,0.0006256965,0.0056539313,0.0015344288,0.0019918957,0.00061362755,0.00076789246,0.00021856446],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00028778386,0.0003483491,0.0003363468,0.00024533525,0.00023580642,0.00034299455,0.0030373193,0.00003078656,0.000034247132,0.51831776,0.456295,0.020488286],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005996305,0.00026234376,0.00023614167,0.00030554118,0.00010721131,0.00003026275,0.004861488,0.00044187522,0.000055257322,0.016582165,0.975747,0.0007710902],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004990314,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0016471378,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8162222,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00196047,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0036797097,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997421},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7042145969","doi":"","title":"OA20: What Happened With Ammon Bundy? SPECIAL EDITION","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Verdict; Government (linguistics); Reading (process); Nova scotia","score_opus":0.008117217870794531,"score_gpt":0.22704771508307997,"score_spread":0.21893049721228544,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7042145969","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000015595802,0.00024360557,0.0000035972614,0.0007957701,0.0013456593,0.00052770576,0.00007138004,0.0002629578,0.9967337],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.00024662397,0.0015680905,0.00074704405,0.00028658152,0.0032533917,0.000017876482,0.00006654464,0.00012552098,0.99368834],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99738246,0.00014107194,0.0005550026,0.0002843255,0.001203487,0.00043365388],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980314,0.0002408271,0.0008653747,0.0003506881,0.00033869655,0.00017305822],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004557703,0.00034528886,0.0004395133,0.00014398892,0.00022872581,0.00032754338,0.0005554374,0.00053157134,0.6769291],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00024504718,0.000281025,0.00012256402,0.000018316488,0.00048297984,0.000002081835,0.00007399229,0.00021754278,0.03714903],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00013688733,0.00003090703,0.0000013220817,0.00014781926,0.000034982484,0.000014648874,0.00045531138,0.000009271073,5.480507e-8,0.00038629764,0.973141,0.025641503],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00048783136,0.00011349605,0.000005016815,0.0009832936,0.000051203864,0.0000102452095,0.0009187068,2.3726186e-7,0.0000058897635,0.00012793312,0.99690914,0.0003869749],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0024479467,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.021386271,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.63978004,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00011661039,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00017046461,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999642},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7043978224","doi":"","title":"Toronto Innocence Project Tackles 1983 Brantford Murder Case","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Interrogation; Homicide; Work (physics)","score_opus":0.03488336521360751,"score_gpt":0.34186500204664616,"score_spread":0.30698163683303864,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7043978224","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.51038927,0.0035106237,0.0018537429,0.0054158564,0.0024338115,0.0014808205,0.00011148461,0.0011992109,0.4736052],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97882247,0.000327892,0.0021932009,0.00089754345,0.00063775975,0.000054808814,0.0000013346393,0.000035209683,0.017029803],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9973371,0.00024602792,0.00038875858,0.0005731219,0.00076264795,0.00069232733],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981858,0.00051757204,0.0001635577,0.00052470306,0.0003314967,0.00027686372],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010169278,0.00023291052,0.0002677345,0.00005418671,0.00089149736,0.0002951282,0.0006801907,0.00019336157,0.0028234336],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0015841731,0.00016627563,0.00009846987,0.00041397658,0.0005032161,0.0016155124,0.00015393028,0.0001466343,0.0009138395],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00022038662,0.00027554596,0.0045409347,0.00008891122,0.00008180633,0.0016327632,0.009943844,0.0000020400553,0.0011596015,0.5172714,0.06644649,0.39833626],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00051599485,0.0000666589,0.0003827645,0.0001464144,0.000017691253,0.00010687597,0.0032803712,0.0000014441742,0.0005400597,0.0058418675,0.9886811,0.0004187747],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.030321151,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.17294756,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9222346,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003019207,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005705979,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99986404},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7045927935","doi":"","title":"BPR #7 ≈ CAVA.BUBBLE.POP","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Gardens Kew)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Praise; Moment (physics); Business process reengineering; Presentation (obstetrics); Working life","score_opus":0.013905409988517284,"score_gpt":0.2530168459017826,"score_spread":0.2391114359132653,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7045927935","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0000059076265,0.0006839924,6.454988e-7,0.0003837732,0.00088765693,0.00042150944,0.00010233916,0.0003169299,0.9971973],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.00042900498,0.0010399387,0.0009461058,0.00025059326,0.0005247247,0.000013633675,0.000044658555,0.00012321169,0.9966281],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9975986,0.00013002758,0.00052811595,0.0002663796,0.0010223846,0.00045448192],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974526,0.00020861794,0.0011547524,0.00067378057,0.00031580086,0.00019440807],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006722121,0.00033337148,0.0004980481,0.00012232516,0.0004157865,0.00024355428,0.0011505712,0.0006728419,0.5093018],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0012477058,0.0003383327,0.00018012198,0.000009584416,0.0005109943,4.3512247e-7,0.00014535018,0.0003130823,0.03220343],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000023852544,0.000022900735,0.0000019468014,0.0001991463,0.00003500677,0.00001657572,0.00050611794,0.000015399963,2.607263e-8,0.00025565692,0.984642,0.014281332],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002598058,0.000042908843,0.00000553151,0.0004280142,0.00004212478,0.00001034969,0.00025179825,8.783951e-7,0.000001656076,0.00006824441,0.99852175,0.00036691662],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.024446052,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.024602795,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.47709835,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008147192,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002052603,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999069},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7071941341","doi":"","title":"Truth and efficiency in civil litigation. Fundamental aspects of fact-finding and evidence-taking in a comparative context","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Research Publications (Maastricht University)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Law Foundation of Nova Scotia","funders":"","keywords":"Context (archaeology); Proposition; Perspective (graphical); Key (lock)","score_opus":0.3418523919425294,"score_gpt":0.44295911498590207,"score_spread":0.10110672304337265,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7071941341","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.091344185,0.004570428,0.00012819136,0.00089372176,0.00007376009,0.0013406735,0.00005319824,0.000054397213,0.9015415],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9293193,0.0008596103,0.000111560796,0.000003248483,0.00004213976,0.0000059511053,0.000012065347,0.000009974481,0.069636114],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9967657,0.00074965955,0.00034108778,0.0005125519,0.001064122,0.00056689105],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99359936,0.004800127,0.00038956717,0.00024819496,0.0007149333,0.00024783405],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0026887055,0.00016970887,0.00038131714,0.004978296,0.00058388524,0.0002332081,0.0006472013,0.00025028808,0.00015432113],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0027075307,0.00020022137,0.000039766604,0.004159405,0.001348584,0.0013451518,0.00038676508,0.00076103985,0.000012492377],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004209123,0.0001885345,0.019179525,0.00014845222,0.000031090363,0.00001142762,0.022384882,0.000006618225,0.000016329053,0.94330037,0.0012251448,0.013465508],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0033852183,0.0005156839,0.23219231,0.007067456,0.000114783026,0.000015813308,0.16084257,0.00026203488,0.00007735361,0.033734374,0.560219,0.0015734265],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006386041,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0046138903,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.90956604,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014029349,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00312923,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8164791},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7093746222","doi":"","title":"Gilbert Rozon’s Bid to Delay Civil Trial Fails, Case Proceeds in Montreal","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"other","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Government (linguistics); Work (physics); Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; Action (physics)","score_opus":0.03509734227025863,"score_gpt":0.36976724148035206,"score_spread":0.33466989921009344,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7093746222","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0003963523,0.00091061566,0.00007088028,0.0011683631,0.0017564758,0.0013415025,0.000020859472,0.00049028324,0.9938447],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.017539755,0.0001069469,0.000637,0.00033890226,0.001659123,0.00014369425,0.000003401324,0.0003324245,0.97923875],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9973248,0.000113197726,0.00042787407,0.0007672397,0.00080642005,0.0005604262],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99906963,0.00015960135,0.00011942865,0.00031231443,0.00007462527,0.00026438295],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00083323277,0.00033941935,0.0004998162,0.0009484408,0.00008768289,0.000480863,0.00055123755,0.00059545663,0.011584226],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007838303,0.00028660157,0.00012479779,0.0013950131,0.00009789899,0.00013151589,0.00016231382,0.00034182842,0.0052132006],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00032420698,0.00006823054,0.0000059307,0.000054628883,0.000026254722,0.0014726208,0.0034598238,0.0000012530706,2.0119789e-7,0.0023200202,0.97027785,0.021989007],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001914959,0.00008699837,0.000002524947,0.0002502489,0.000033905006,0.00003504847,0.0024132684,0.000002646101,0.0000010615357,0.001897857,0.992973,0.0003884632],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.071038075,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8439485,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7729104,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00020392417,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000520428,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99995863},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7094164610","doi":"","title":"The Admissibility of Social Media\\nEvidence in Canada\\nPart 2: The Canada Evidence Act","year":2021,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Insecta mundi","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Admissible evidence; Statutory law; Common law; Rules of evidence; Federal Rules of Evidence; Hearsay","score_opus":0.07726878272310969,"score_gpt":0.339195287427192,"score_spread":0.2619265047040823,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7094164610","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.94213134,0.015582388,0.0000034230884,0.035156325,0.0041540586,0.000434777,0.000069247726,0.000012138113,0.002456284],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99596757,0.0022091009,0.00001492829,0.00088083366,0.00039646804,0.00002586283,0.0000013866138,0.0000210873,0.00048277553],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9906343,0.0024946162,0.0013939564,0.00081664504,0.003537992,0.0011224976],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96952623,0.027114313,0.00080159656,0.0011211969,0.0011398018,0.00029688765],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004557571,0.00036461907,0.0006261185,0.00004192428,0.002205962,0.00033840231,0.0030324769,0.00017881682,0.001081369],"category_scores_gemma":[0.052452136,0.00025447586,0.00015427708,0.0027683307,0.0011403041,0.0004944628,0.0006147223,0.00093799626,0.0000063744424],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00069305015,0.0003105838,0.5970714,0.00062856165,0.00027470727,0.00096785993,0.11007658,0.0002349199,0.00056247314,0.009592855,0.093836844,0.18575017],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002726663,0.00002985625,0.8812123,0.0008427963,0.000073428404,0.000012343909,0.014726695,0.00009993304,0.000464096,0.0034779813,0.09824079,0.0005471143],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.99974257,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9999994,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.2841409,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003525094,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.1673034,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99999076},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7094264984","doi":"","title":"The Evolution of the Admissibilityof Hearsay Evidence in Canada","year":2017,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Lincoln (University of Nebraska)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Hearsay; Admissible evidence; Federal Rules of Evidence; Circumstantial evidence; Derogation","score_opus":0.04887960794457446,"score_gpt":0.291949848466087,"score_spread":0.24307024052151255,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7094264984","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9707315,0.0024152354,0.00008376419,0.019184051,0.0012547359,0.0005664691,0.000032097898,0.000006397011,0.0057257647],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9948621,0.0005481163,0.0001190286,0.000028030028,0.00004988774,2.2451816e-7,1.1948772e-7,0.000005955484,0.0043865475],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99685895,0.00059077074,0.00036500412,0.0004269105,0.0013487804,0.00040960094],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99500716,0.0016497122,0.0012501699,0.0014349517,0.0005101879,0.00014783027],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021003305,0.00015490944,0.00035569814,0.00007095384,0.0035470726,0.00008608754,0.0042510037,0.00015215142,0.00021183923],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0047124983,0.00013163475,0.00017352366,0.00071471825,0.0020418284,0.00077602937,0.0010233606,0.0003533719,0.0000074542518],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00071525655,0.00026944067,0.80717576,0.00036598937,0.00010449259,0.000038883903,0.020562397,0.0007385428,0.00025152988,0.015225302,0.007463599,0.14708883],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00033636336,0.000047956088,0.93899494,0.00082682294,0.00004377208,6.7132777e-7,0.040686686,0.0006734197,0.00004263093,0.0051035606,0.013085766,0.00015740574],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.97164774,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9978622,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.14693141,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0020141324,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.017685233,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99775016},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7094431733","doi":"","title":"Editor's Note","year":2011,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Insecta mundi","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Wonder; Allegation; Skepticism; Innocence; Appeal; Criminal law","score_opus":0.06819496210436532,"score_gpt":0.3424680416687495,"score_spread":0.2742730795643842,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7094431733","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.08971845,0.0020656458,0.0021796767,0.0008485544,0.12469866,0.0007240426,0.00004012116,0.0005053895,0.77921945],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9729867,0.00046906635,0.002073551,0.0005014913,0.01810272,0.000016672262,0.0000014885007,0.00005431561,0.005793982],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9959692,0.0003650367,0.0006450335,0.00075010536,0.0012911164,0.0009795493],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99756837,0.00049775786,0.00037380526,0.0007485822,0.00042250662,0.00038896897],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012573834,0.00037089712,0.0004112087,0.00023889175,0.001075528,0.00030852846,0.0016729388,0.00053028617,0.010080316],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0014709494,0.0003820311,0.00022191837,0.0012816286,0.0009094582,0.0008418838,0.00034480944,0.0005573813,0.0051174522],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00051104487,0.0016265152,0.028339691,0.00020775135,0.00021614568,0.00029284437,0.36116773,0.000007116505,0.00035711445,0.044599406,0.35773554,0.20493908],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00043307897,0.00028995422,0.028327357,0.00016456054,0.000081235594,0.0000071107243,0.00051068456,0.000036151498,0.00011068903,0.024110697,0.9451719,0.0007565607],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.026381794,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011885608,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.88326824,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00018981918,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008914884,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99986315},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7095607895","doi":"","title":"Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture The Roles of Local Rules of Criminal Procedure in the Process of Rule by Law","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Process (computing); Criminal procedure; Rule of law; Due process; Criminal law","score_opus":0.013333319619002887,"score_gpt":0.3176541631606754,"score_spread":0.30432084354167255,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7095607895","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9838759,0.0006682952,0.000010481537,0.0011701542,0.00001834872,0.00036805993,0.00005331919,0.0000048985985,0.013830548],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9994423,0.000038207472,0.000090240115,0.00024447715,0.000018416666,0.0000143939,0.0000028132959,0.0000053008416,0.0001438797],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99857634,0.00009886692,0.00036453444,0.00015690541,0.00059216196,0.00021118061],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99929506,0.00014888766,0.00021732072,0.000083403516,0.00018226441,0.00007306176],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004692665,0.00010367245,0.0002188419,0.000059740658,0.00016332539,0.0000264567,0.00062423653,0.00013875903,0.00019482346],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00010576728,0.000054163425,0.000037880276,0.00030965862,0.0014600744,0.0002729273,0.00003722722,0.00015417454,0.0000021846545],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00016571145,0.0006752282,0.049716882,0.0012709777,0.00009484456,0.0000029028922,0.41957524,0.00003601476,0.0045700716,0.47406197,0.037936248,0.011893917],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007932621,0.0002317943,0.045629323,0.0004033567,0.00010057209,0.000016651387,0.808374,0.00008043316,0.097562544,0.035545185,0.010900961,0.00036190962],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.079132885,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2347235,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.43851677,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000024860661,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00024618462,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9269993},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7097949131","doi":"","title":"36th INTERNATIONAL MATHEMATICAL OLYMPIAD Canadian Problems for Consideration","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Olympiad; International comparisons; Nice","score_opus":0.17287763934470313,"score_gpt":0.3652782918769412,"score_spread":0.1924006525322381,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7097949131","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0048472523,0.000009620126,0.036117647,0.0028856366,0.00047694027,0.00042002884,0.000008762478,0.000087371714,0.95514673],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.95505327,0.0000040082514,0.031749398,0.0006358913,0.00011335578,0.000045543733,0.00000362842,0.000007235409,0.012387642],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9993273,0.000020861804,0.00014352941,0.0001237222,0.00020184251,0.00018272917],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994266,0.00012040725,0.000035563062,0.000069676265,0.00021412798,0.00013359751],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00046532412,0.000047598696,0.00006154367,0.00008442976,0.00025266423,0.000095891744,0.00017977081,0.00005830757,0.004810652],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00082287105,0.000041644482,0.000026736852,0.00007616961,0.00008076881,0.00019571639,0.000010168697,0.000028626619,0.00019553986],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000028160944,0.000019548608,0.00033230998,0.0000046859936,0.00000738003,8.9299976e-7,0.008207086,8.0632964e-7,0.0000056161953,0.9802053,0.006497259,0.004716295],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00027338683,0.000033595115,0.0010689563,0.000028727116,0.000010660697,0.000003449575,0.0036337008,0.0004185239,0.000350299,0.68645954,0.30752254,0.00019659035],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.022088474,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.44828272,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.95020604,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000077577126,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004990888,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9960991},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7098055661","doi":"","title":"Balancing Legal Process with Scientific Expertise: Expert Witness Methodology in Five Nations and Suggestions for Reform of Pos-DaubertU.S. Reliability Determinations‖ Marquette law review [0025-3987","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Witness; Process (computing); Legal process; Reliability (semiconductor); Balance (ability); Common law; Legal research","score_opus":0.0813799896927988,"score_gpt":0.43155708843417306,"score_spread":0.35017709874137426,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7098055661","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.80928713,0.025160288,0.05533824,0.035094377,0.0017105507,0.008032533,0.00020259056,0.00045196034,0.06472232],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9678845,0.00036847644,0.029401617,0.00047898898,0.000047991292,0.00051547686,0.000015522131,0.0000138449,0.0012736158],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99772805,0.000399295,0.0005330813,0.000424089,0.00047690686,0.00043856647],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9968013,0.0016413977,0.00023132336,0.00030714626,0.00087769603,0.00014109704],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0046352525,0.00015963463,0.0003929147,0.00025096498,0.0007627507,0.00008508819,0.0002988067,0.00011848442,0.000086090164],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0039166287,0.00012366132,0.00005073967,0.0012177897,0.0010590925,0.0013129358,0.000060199614,0.0001224583,0.0000020866098],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00012586814,0.0006129266,0.0062011178,0.0022647902,0.00003079536,0.000002593489,0.030569497,0.000032041815,0.00029324193,0.93588364,0.0011579167,0.022825595],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.009856519,0.0015694071,0.104203045,0.026661333,0.0010165574,0.0003691129,0.12568575,0.0020672984,0.031397488,0.128787,0.56121653,0.007169955],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0019049058,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.017870408,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8070966,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00023505349,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00039028298,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9972107},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7103387681","doi":"","title":"Balancing Legal Process with Scientific Expertise: Expert Witness Methodology in Five Nations and Suggestions for Reform of Post-<i>Daubert</i> U.S. Reliability Determinations","year":2012,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Strengths and weaknesses; Process (computing); Witness; Legal process; Reliability (semiconductor); Element (criminal law); Legal practice","score_opus":0.04414576917983036,"score_gpt":0.36652075541618195,"score_spread":0.3223749862363516,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7103387681","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9797615,0.003246618,0.0064550466,0.0030414679,0.0014603194,0.0020357813,0.00023606593,0.00009221632,0.0036710259],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9744997,0.00009795171,0.022678465,0.0002534501,0.00023674085,0.0007265591,0.00003073255,0.000050889623,0.0014255061],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9947127,0.000841943,0.0011927526,0.001077898,0.0010201104,0.0011545663],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9924783,0.0030273334,0.0006524104,0.0007111656,0.002585463,0.0005453236],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0056924974,0.00044553756,0.0008075151,0.00057802466,0.0022924931,0.0004020701,0.0007501906,0.00042074078,0.00017019658],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008146584,0.00040075387,0.00013964108,0.0026223098,0.0030365933,0.003457636,0.00019336717,0.00048097922,0.000010925597],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0017565092,0.003923283,0.02681702,0.0022063272,0.00019628547,0.000015815085,0.21247625,0.0008503019,0.00510651,0.7164047,0.00053701905,0.029710017],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.018755624,0.0042093033,0.16125578,0.0099325925,0.0014439255,0.00046953448,0.45843697,0.0052743964,0.08345164,0.09487108,0.15241069,0.009488475],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005388138,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.049214605,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6215336,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00066358264,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014479753,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99984443},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7104003265","doi":"10.3138/utlj-2024-0095","title":"Old habits die hard: Precedent, psychology, and the admissibility of forensic evidence","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Toronto Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Circumstantial evidence; Scientific evidence; Scrutiny; Cognitive bias; Harm; Acknowledgement; Deference; Rigour; Cognition; Delusion","score_opus":0.03903203113210236,"score_gpt":0.34721307698462583,"score_spread":0.3081810458525235,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7104003265","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5639794,0.033035383,0.0030637772,0.018596914,0.0013990169,0.00062752183,0.000015747715,0.00004871934,0.3792335],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99110246,0.004526988,0.0017914535,0.00014130889,0.000028522096,4.548649e-8,5.6956928e-8,0.0000016618428,0.0024075056],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989761,0.00031340084,0.00016213756,0.00013882332,0.00027772004,0.00013182517],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985243,0.0006575869,0.00022912658,0.00017667883,0.00033593643,0.00007639119],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0015823388,0.000058989117,0.00019132688,0.000020565689,0.0007041529,0.000029214501,0.0005256302,0.000068394205,0.00033781875],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009813085,0.00004768964,0.000087375796,0.000057550307,0.0014424798,0.00048814417,0.00011734033,0.0001218168,8.838746e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.004426992,0.00035651738,0.06080551,0.00023345876,0.00044051587,0.000032306998,0.059686124,0.000024476927,0.00037134037,0.51700544,0.030486792,0.3261305],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0058891494,0.00033009655,0.4855649,0.0018399413,0.00047854648,0.00002111509,0.034888092,0.000045610286,0.00038576484,0.1385633,0.33162296,0.00037051152],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.020247044,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.17870113,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.42712304,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009989787,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00016329515,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9862772},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7104251515","doi":"10.71781/2561","title":"L’authenticité dans le droit de la preuve civile québécois","year":2023,"lang":"fr","type":"dissertation","venue":"Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Context (archaeology); Subject (documents); ESPACE; Order (exchange)","score_opus":0.00857666493945542,"score_gpt":0.22062193059828225,"score_spread":0.21204526565882684,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7104251515","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.82888204,0.007640017,0.000787772,0.00044632258,0.0019867006,0.00040912916,0.00010180031,0.0003811607,0.15936507],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.72933626,0.0008838952,0.00044217298,0.00006746104,0.00029507707,0.000038518912,0.00016213443,0.000065636,0.26870888],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955661,0.0007218295,0.00056383066,0.0009117602,0.0013893476,0.00084709976],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99696213,0.0010152907,0.00060954323,0.00047533042,0.00041202072,0.0005256919],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009531422,0.0005354479,0.0005393062,0.00043686788,0.014311084,0.00021160663,0.0011635284,0.001009233,0.00010640258],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00057849975,0.00069249654,0.0004885961,0.0012592357,0.0013195866,0.00058509276,0.00025019018,0.00072283705,0.00041117592],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00041092976,0.0005080139,0.0131302215,0.00032560245,0.0005120193,0.0035768193,0.61667216,0.0033881748,0.0064559723,0.34018785,0.0016900805,0.013142158],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0012344235,0.00013623766,0.15383945,0.0010349144,0.00080422556,0.00048198857,0.58976054,0.0015057764,0.005737444,0.019122574,0.2248894,0.0014530044],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.59104097,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.48310298,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.32106528,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012136702,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009922157,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995526},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7104434747","doi":"10.71781/17929","title":"Biais cognitifs et facteurs associés au verdict et à la peine rendus par un juge dans un contexte de crime violent contre la personne","year":2022,"lang":"fr","type":"dissertation","venue":"Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Criminal responsibility; Criminal liability; Crime analysis","score_opus":0.010722308545461965,"score_gpt":0.2513198298254181,"score_spread":0.24059752127995615,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7104434747","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8612291,0.012856619,0.000395925,0.0012658368,0.0019625283,0.0006056412,0.0008930326,0.00027032796,0.12052096],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96183074,0.0028821183,0.0003790441,0.0005383291,0.00020219915,0.00007315051,0.0010215683,0.00008748516,0.032985363],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.991624,0.0032843656,0.0007519299,0.0012241368,0.0020858345,0.0010297644],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9947312,0.0023210081,0.0010888149,0.00048350365,0.0006744244,0.0007010711],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021222364,0.0008458075,0.00090145407,0.0003913378,0.014572524,0.00028420266,0.0011652875,0.0009649731,0.00084066775],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001037921,0.0010256239,0.00070802175,0.0009941625,0.0012310146,0.00079943496,0.0003981117,0.0016047184,0.00010740719],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0022785873,0.0016074125,0.04071847,0.00029238878,0.0021213288,0.013866161,0.73045856,0.0022495748,0.006371253,0.15958413,0.0019492422,0.038502917],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0035418542,0.00033165733,0.3453388,0.0008588736,0.0016576274,0.0010258819,0.3816664,0.00025790406,0.0029237575,0.0018693405,0.2589109,0.0016170108],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.12428008,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.031104123,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.34879214,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009224767,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007951592,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992194},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7104439050","doi":"10.71781/12492","title":"Comment les juges détectent-ils les mensonges lors de procès? Étude des mécanismes communicationnels sous-jacents aux déclarations de culpabilité pour parjure","year":2020,"lang":"fr","type":"dissertation","venue":"Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Self evaluation; Determiner; Decision system","score_opus":0.03006689949863006,"score_gpt":0.2640394566979571,"score_spread":0.23397255719932702,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7104439050","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9297031,0.03666748,0.0029801277,0.018808866,0.0005859549,0.0011203103,0.00016762555,0.00039352602,0.009572984],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9710169,0.0074505666,0.010205057,0.0005007518,0.00026512623,0.00014586146,0.00034067067,0.000074283926,0.010000819],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9945742,0.0011817537,0.00082491164,0.00096343947,0.0013750775,0.0010806118],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99545884,0.0010575114,0.000896822,0.0006514277,0.0011403138,0.00079508184],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008073005,0.0007663643,0.00072116224,0.0003260203,0.02297246,0.0003434037,0.0017950118,0.0009081331,0.00014893571],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011620276,0.00089388055,0.00047847442,0.00090535235,0.0017560035,0.000782014,0.00042500775,0.0009883316,0.00009163603],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00083422964,0.0017006904,0.13653429,0.0010857162,0.0013874875,0.00063512154,0.6139324,0.008896993,0.012632835,0.17861696,0.0047272816,0.039016057],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0015670309,0.00028893485,0.16273244,0.0015690175,0.0013114067,0.00024611392,0.6004307,0.0029360158,0.012521263,0.010228616,0.20445679,0.0017116212],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.048510574,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0728272,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1997295,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011071917,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0066428166,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9993512},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7114783751","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.5711762","title":"Doctrine of Custody: The Cognitive Property Right and The Forensic Architecture of Memory","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"preprint","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Doctrine; Property (philosophy); Cognition; Cognitive architecture; Architecture; Cognitive systems","score_opus":0.011158141813217176,"score_gpt":0.29359080964332246,"score_spread":0.2824326678301053,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7114783751","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.42805058,0.26765046,0.04035406,0.083460145,0.0060775746,0.013036117,0.00032238782,0.00012192843,0.16092674],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.93494153,0.05134623,0.00008316733,0.00019829036,0.00052310823,0.000032299344,0.000002232251,0.00002446697,0.012848678],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9910357,0.0026024396,0.0015255024,0.000675877,0.0017073676,0.0024530839],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9916564,0.0035710633,0.002445317,0.00058761163,0.001623465,0.00011609594],"candidate_categories":["sts","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0162039,0.00059014006,0.0013020725,0.0003402928,0.0014667166,0.00018234758,0.0023416197,0.00042965676,0.00013592507],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002759222,0.00024337143,0.0006661301,0.0011379711,0.00535799,0.00014909182,0.001025256,0.008808159,0.000003774201],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0030535832,0.00018783394,0.000100511235,0.00033852702,0.0021831573,0.0000043501364,0.028678589,0.0003951792,0.000029127195,0.21619439,0.00018750067,0.7486473],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0033760122,0.00041224094,0.000217327,0.0017322246,0.0014093408,0.00028262116,0.033727277,0.0000857853,0.0008758696,0.9511293,0.0063268337,0.00042516],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009097919,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006978181,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7482221,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00047042876,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.018446194,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998332},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7116055167","doi":"10.1017/9781009608282.005","title":"England","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Legislation; Demise; Criminal justice; Legislature; Commission; Economic Justice","score_opus":0.034649383151266616,"score_gpt":0.25787619563776526,"score_spread":0.22322681248649864,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7116055167","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00024469383,0.0005055386,0.00065330096,0.00012499411,0.0018021605,0.000813549,0.00043561505,0.00026726065,0.9951529],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0134109305,0.0013973389,0.00019229611,0.00018774708,0.0004769013,8.368929e-7,0.000019540445,0.000049418868,0.98426497],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9958118,0.000276433,0.0005212743,0.0014071617,0.0011515575,0.0008317273],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9960902,0.0009159855,0.0006140823,0.0010522588,0.00083603873,0.0004914433],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00062352826,0.0008049544,0.0009545078,0.00059124205,0.0018259537,0.0003162939,0.0023325074,0.0012135854,0.000086151085],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002508742,0.0010233968,0.00054707105,0.00007046916,0.0016195847,0.00028688592,0.0013312037,0.0011220376,0.00011588878],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00021335954,0.000022057557,0.000005168246,0.00016958067,0.00022616149,0.00039634158,0.0005521134,0.0000027119813,0.0000061455657,0.92751974,0.038965262,0.031921353],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010486057,0.00006770862,0.000021416614,0.00072259986,0.0005622581,0.000005314179,0.00044959813,0.000026489652,0.00009961012,0.00006152534,0.9960054,0.00092944445],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00057189265,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000044423996,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9570402,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00050859165,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012102325,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994735},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7116102461","doi":"10.1017/9781009608282.002","title":"Miscarriages of Justice, Wrongful Convictions and Proven Innocence as Means of Rationing Justice","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Economic Justice; Rationing; Criminal justice; Legislation","score_opus":0.030068149822462396,"score_gpt":0.276061522587083,"score_spread":0.2459933727646206,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7116102461","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0022288489,0.0006505626,0.003529067,0.00010046123,0.0008493324,0.000959562,0.00051402027,0.00006618958,0.991102],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.14754345,0.001556409,0.0007660658,0.00005855094,0.00013120969,0.0000017058809,0.00001404155,0.000029920562,0.84989864],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9967851,0.0002446619,0.0007782049,0.000897492,0.0008760007,0.00041854664],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9944639,0.0014271977,0.0013664907,0.00061474094,0.0018874318,0.00024022187],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00058416114,0.0005073046,0.0009240637,0.0005618062,0.0012477215,0.00010722017,0.0010495816,0.0006235796,0.000029288673],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00084591453,0.0006450365,0.00022903981,0.00013811045,0.002521047,0.00039373065,0.000750846,0.0005982683,0.0000039611828],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00023536546,0.000039800674,0.000021226093,0.0021083818,0.0002721513,0.000035864796,0.0023779362,0.000058864145,0.000255829,0.9881035,0.0024376789,0.0040534097],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016877922,0.0003804246,0.00028777876,0.004326564,0.009925354,0.000015843192,0.019510873,0.0005789573,0.0028043827,0.00025221857,0.95901734,0.0012124841],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008619451,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00005330192,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.98785126,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00016539369,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013110596,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996001},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7117291022","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.5964874","title":"Causation as a Conduct Element","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"preprint","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Saskatchewan","funders":"","keywords":"","score_opus":0.04255147795175337,"score_gpt":0.39026134924740397,"score_spread":0.3477098712956506,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7117291022","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.29909304,0.11347888,0.102464035,0.071722336,0.038414404,0.007429894,0.00015789707,0.00074699917,0.3664925],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.78856134,0.11641199,0.0003183057,0.0006173814,0.0019909318,0.00005180388,0.000017179207,0.00004821636,0.09198283],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.985815,0.0014193314,0.0018619148,0.0012741984,0.0027386213,0.0068909554],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9948559,0.0005858635,0.0019602128,0.00073511555,0.0014848107,0.00037809557],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","research_integrity","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016019171,0.0008276972,0.0010052967,0.0007997564,0.0024908334,0.0010980485,0.0026544558,0.00090721506,0.0017274086],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0019161076,0.00083139184,0.0006893279,0.0013594094,0.00041377597,0.00059681496,0.00082332524,0.011718361,0.00065080926],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00018366223,0.00026124634,0.00019761859,0.000089665475,0.0010204037,0.000012330999,0.0075139664,0.00062206446,0.000036383546,0.6773796,0.0015117109,0.31117132],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007365664,0.0004003628,0.00007106288,0.0005011514,0.00037428967,0.00014382001,0.030074596,0.000051657607,0.00008582096,0.7891253,0.17773561,0.0006997351],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0017578944,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011975425,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4894683,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.010559185,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.09490764,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999389},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7126080726","doi":"10.70651/3083-6018/2025.12.13","title":"CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF JURY FUNCTIONING: A COMPARATIVE STUDY","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Social Development Economic and Legal Issues","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Hung jury; Jury trial; Jurisdiction; Institution; Adversarial system; Constitutional law; Constitution; Economic Justice; Separation of powers","score_opus":0.0640030049659283,"score_gpt":0.3706220115974293,"score_spread":0.306619006631501,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7126080726","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.90968734,0.0033310323,0.00013388299,0.0011608838,0.0011497736,0.0006445823,0.000022463513,0.000038541522,0.083831474],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9778603,0.00026396307,0.00044337363,0.000082072,0.00023235485,0.000033843207,0.0000057931084,0.000005916344,0.021072423],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9975318,0.00022913236,0.0009525757,0.0006449317,0.00028044148,0.00036113602],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99894434,0.000288879,0.00039602222,0.000096271964,0.00018483408,0.00008964066],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010382927,0.0003242526,0.00078934006,0.00017187143,0.0021996698,0.00048602678,0.00024618593,0.0001857209,0.00027636104],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009221021,0.00035091836,0.00006695513,0.00025258862,0.0027989214,0.0006595858,0.00033108512,0.00023586709,0.00002966839],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00019311874,0.00030485314,0.016806813,0.00008580015,0.00054747885,0.0000058406517,0.049145214,0.000023086777,0.000004800994,0.91397923,0.0010111018,0.017892668],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010310328,0.0001061354,0.13316599,0.00012538438,0.00011004618,0.0000019682177,0.09598895,0.000026121095,0.0001101868,0.0012528087,0.76767683,0.00040454214],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00054037245,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0017314783,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9127264,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00026592505,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0026267897,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999149},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7126232881","doi":"10.21181/kjpc.2025.34.4.495","title":"The feasibility of adopting of a private prosecution system in Korea","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Korean Association of Public Safety and Criminal Justice","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Statutory law; Adversarial system; Private law; Criminal law; Criminal justice; Common law; Law enforcement; Accountability","score_opus":0.047878111254715715,"score_gpt":0.3395900341568555,"score_spread":0.2917119229021398,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7126232881","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.95244795,0.0026781387,0.0047538853,0.003745406,0.0012851807,0.0014486153,0.00015316985,0.00004836264,0.0334393],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.997748,0.0012883062,0.0004050709,0.000027982833,0.00005961913,0.0000083834875,0.0000059649233,0.000008143601,0.00044849917],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9942874,0.0015192007,0.002015827,0.00043039772,0.0012453418,0.0005018408],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98986703,0.0048311665,0.002952187,0.0003374485,0.0019263143,0.00008582667],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014910888,0.0002111935,0.0006682195,0.0002802101,0.000692036,0.000109011824,0.00057489896,0.0003421739,0.000009904247],"category_scores_gemma":[0.020895563,0.00018541135,0.00014968263,0.0020574918,0.0005936674,0.0004436292,0.0002274122,0.0003212838,9.3049505e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000768461,0.00048629162,0.06597452,0.008313978,0.00016634924,0.0000010688591,0.023782004,0.00007242798,0.00015797128,0.812525,0.00010406476,0.08764792],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0025565585,0.0003752045,0.580742,0.0033931448,0.0024597654,0.0000017972569,0.39923382,0.0020387608,0.0005863048,0.004319422,0.0038811986,0.00041202415],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00040499071,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008706275,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.80820554,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009625006,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010506184,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.98735183},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7128202985","doi":"10.3138/ccar.v13i1.101","title":"Carriage Motions in Ontario: Inconsistent Application of an Indeterminate Test","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Class Action Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Carriage; Test (biology); Indeterminate; Consistency (knowledge bases); Settlement (finance); Predictability; Jurisdiction","score_opus":0.07334546094157109,"score_gpt":0.3825966366259377,"score_spread":0.3092511756843666,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7128202985","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7716298,0.007398728,0.0005588154,0.012124962,0.0018965431,0.0044314186,0.00012324253,0.00017626732,0.20166019],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99724156,0.000980581,0.0001920434,0.0007799783,0.00007379078,0.00005543764,0.000009201768,0.000007727848,0.0006597011],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989711,0.00012298071,0.00030661628,0.00020454868,0.00019488417,0.00019988274],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990069,0.000070701346,0.00016337923,0.00026397576,0.00024173454,0.00025326404],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006878943,0.00007474056,0.00018534396,0.00019833984,0.00023177057,0.000028409308,0.00021812278,0.00007524979,0.00044657176],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00059667765,0.000080175225,0.00003880507,0.00059993035,0.00016975122,0.00023728165,0.000010124483,0.00012499912,0.000076420874],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000036012646,0.00013421019,0.04279745,0.0006143032,0.000013160465,0.000012536972,0.002497582,0.000006914459,0.0003626434,0.010498095,0.004347402,0.9387121],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000696922,0.000034098837,0.09876448,0.00057997205,0.000021398111,0.0000030675037,0.00021811016,0.000023004826,0.000036433375,0.00049808796,0.89963603,0.000115624265],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.79279774,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.999363,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9385965,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009706429,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016734275,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.48896477},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7132952132","doi":"","title":"A Dworkinian theory of criminal procedure","year":2004,"lang":"","type":"dissertation","venue":"TSpace","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal procedure; Criminal justice; Procedural justice; Democracy; Criminal law; State (computer science); Work (physics)","score_opus":0.04924885770906896,"score_gpt":0.42411754331193197,"score_spread":0.374868685602863,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7132952132","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7663692,0.006040049,0.0004630997,0.0006459716,0.0026646825,0.0012443883,0.000015772799,0.00015898596,0.2223978],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.92004424,0.00060157006,0.0010671685,0.000114289665,0.00043950925,0.00003972745,0.000046780933,0.000081305996,0.077565394],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9953379,0.0003775586,0.00084366894,0.0008980062,0.0018045278,0.0007383113],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99620974,0.00064753543,0.0013894418,0.00052966946,0.00095928874,0.00026430516],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016094455,0.0005858617,0.00085498084,0.00038798177,0.00067229045,0.00016456685,0.0013048473,0.00093572645,0.0039798715],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0022736257,0.00059239555,0.00035827936,0.0016291806,0.0006815301,0.00021316903,0.00007530615,0.0007329621,0.00042942655],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0010224781,0.00046729058,0.000105368126,0.0026649502,0.00014037076,0.000020684252,0.8252429,0.0000849224,0.0006164326,0.11138131,0.00091061695,0.057342686],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008123684,0.00046467435,0.0044687185,0.0055087404,0.00076782133,0.000007321121,0.89079297,0.000004671714,0.004924479,0.06190357,0.029071815,0.0012728345],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00037716253,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011672092,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.153675,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00018894183,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0048417784,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99965274},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7133043778","doi":"","title":"&quot;I heard him say...&quot;: Jurors&apos; ability to determine the value of hearsay testimony in a criminal murder trial","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"dissertation","venue":"TSpace","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Hearsay; Value (mathematics); Criminal trial; Homicide; Culpability; Poison control; Suicide prevention; Human factors and ergonomics","score_opus":0.10857252955554406,"score_gpt":0.4827475936081905,"score_spread":0.37417506405264644,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7133043778","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9663479,0.0003567437,0.000043363238,0.0043389704,0.0014055732,0.0018216849,0.000014580383,0.00008814562,0.025583066],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9054346,0.00016052327,0.0030365153,0.00061087916,0.00094464066,0.00025280507,0.00005941167,0.00010933091,0.089391276],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99547774,0.000745976,0.0008360021,0.0007656651,0.0015018298,0.00067279476],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9961608,0.0019032223,0.00046892546,0.0007459528,0.0005032801,0.00021781896],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0026853743,0.0004098048,0.00078059634,0.0003511892,0.00036540267,0.00015662884,0.0010631845,0.00047633672,0.00069682545],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008053468,0.0003375788,0.00024014978,0.0015040847,0.00027001428,0.00015109137,0.000087755245,0.0006355428,0.000120701516],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.041304942,0.0022856018,0.0017000737,0.0013591541,0.00012916196,0.00014006668,0.70100945,0.0011201026,0.0028150051,0.006894612,0.042868458,0.19837338],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.028353473,0.004373262,0.08353392,0.004034963,0.0010861879,0.000023957198,0.33164003,0.00027781865,0.0036373176,0.022348588,0.5160571,0.004633396],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00934278,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02988029,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.47318864,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00027384612,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014191729,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999076},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7133044954","doi":"","title":"The challenge for cause: does it reduce bias in the jury system?","year":2004,"lang":"","type":"dissertation","venue":"TSpace","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Jury selection; Hung jury; Test (biology); Economic Justice; Prejudice (legal term); Causation; Jury instructions","score_opus":0.11989277191714005,"score_gpt":0.46288826195894345,"score_spread":0.3429954900418034,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7133044954","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.45421168,0.051665097,0.00033642811,0.22031161,0.03461092,0.019082356,0.00014319629,0.000554855,0.21908385],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94429535,0.0071046217,0.00011018115,0.00019689486,0.001297805,0.00091380265,0.00004231712,0.000086561355,0.045952443],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99399394,0.000950234,0.00103832,0.0010316065,0.0019084521,0.0010774455],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99123895,0.0057399482,0.0011605398,0.0010440795,0.0006871598,0.00012934855],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0066881725,0.00062585174,0.00067773135,0.00020895303,0.003294795,0.0010415774,0.0028253612,0.0007515875,0.00008629893],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0036689572,0.00032481487,0.00034136925,0.001399621,0.0004577262,0.00024616392,0.00007449782,0.0008649955,0.00019445109],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00046134213,0.0002559163,0.000011889326,0.0018392937,0.00014090254,0.000029480043,0.7974891,0.00009632993,0.000049872364,0.1659017,0.007864917,0.025859214],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00043712804,0.00013132417,0.00024082944,0.0018121799,0.00013797746,0.000003080887,0.741714,0.000015835956,0.0001375347,0.0053563383,0.2495347,0.00047910333],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015198992,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.036971316,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4900837,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00051355804,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0021498667,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999954},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7133234165","doi":"10.53724/inspiration/v10n2.05","title":"Section 69 of BNS 2023: Balancing Justice and Safeguards Against False Allegations in Cases of Sexual Intercourse by Deception","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Research Inspiration","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Deception; Misrepresentation; Safeguarding; Section (typography); Coercion (linguistics); Economic Justice; Criminal justice; Allegation","score_opus":0.09316472128634468,"score_gpt":0.4625230141645823,"score_spread":0.3693582928782376,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7133234165","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9866501,0.0015865543,0.0036814192,0.0012883397,0.0005845026,0.00077753485,0.00006564534,0.00002010054,0.0053457716],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9964286,0.0019175233,0.00021998199,0.000047805835,0.0001534493,0.000041657164,0.000034350443,0.000012770386,0.0011438382],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.995052,0.0014827827,0.0010248548,0.0005589476,0.0014049015,0.0004765271],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9954772,0.0020844364,0.0003445127,0.00029761044,0.0016829981,0.0001132397],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006238241,0.00018053202,0.00036197342,0.001314028,0.0006503242,0.00017707347,0.0003096178,0.00033746613,0.00008731574],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009584058,0.00020399409,0.000041065567,0.0036202539,0.00079753494,0.0010298894,0.00019713782,0.0005973886,0.000007755918],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00091520284,0.002038385,0.014669327,0.0051514525,0.00016297275,0.000022228878,0.036459547,0.004635892,0.3048919,0.022369087,0.024483705,0.58420026],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0109344255,0.009954964,0.121996544,0.015431758,0.0012623188,0.000017723507,0.5507864,0.07373587,0.105082035,0.024141544,0.08378751,0.0028689315],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0040408284,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0214553,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5813314,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00056124915,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0015049913,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9987586},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7145819691","doi":"","title":"訴えの主観的追加的併合および弁論の併合による集団訴訟の活性化　ー広域係属訴訟（MDL）の発展におけるフランシスコ・マクガヴァンの功績を踏まえてー","year":2024,"lang":"ja","type":"article","venue":"Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Mass tort; Economic Justice; Judicial opinion; Judicial reform; Tort; Perspective (graphical); Quarter (Canadian coin); Civil procedure","score_opus":0.038199609757320015,"score_gpt":0.3520454992888351,"score_spread":0.3138458895315151,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7145819691","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11549842,0.14391142,0.016119655,0.019304415,0.19894429,0.0038494486,0.012891358,0.005970768,0.48351023],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9557983,0.00307332,0.0035882813,0.00066351687,0.013537527,0.00015282918,0.000802729,0.00014200162,0.022241447],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9891924,0.00055789866,0.0018250477,0.0024589505,0.004338143,0.0016275101],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99398744,0.0019087413,0.00041839355,0.0016723404,0.0010917488,0.0009213185],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024453516,0.0010766567,0.0009317094,0.0007419943,0.003979773,0.0039314125,0.0020818985,0.00075323787,0.0017139491],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0037219175,0.001055451,0.00059141545,0.003812362,0.0031974595,0.005134899,0.0010718058,0.001502916,0.005338863],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00035893527,0.0006950778,0.00057661074,0.0015241873,0.00073962397,0.0059640002,0.008689478,0.00035353063,0.0026638263,0.7747757,0.18444248,0.019216582],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004440108,0.00013142776,0.00044159766,0.002733042,0.000368679,0.00045792953,0.0018380912,0.0004908539,0.0017368927,0.0031016688,0.98697907,0.0012767505],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0022396746,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009928918,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8402999,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014293736,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0067446777,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995153},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7146402651","doi":"","title":"The Failure to Enforce Criminal Law : Does it Impede the Development of Social Discourse on Important Policy Issues ?","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal law; Criminal justice; Discourse analysis; Government (linguistics); Public discourse; Civil discourse","score_opus":0.028520983884537505,"score_gpt":0.3790173395636885,"score_spread":0.350496355679151,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7146402651","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7358313,0.00044686478,0.0017259114,0.15851313,0.005662773,0.0024739522,0.0006305007,0.00028885546,0.09442669],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99173015,0.000029420173,0.0024984083,0.00071769796,0.0021620223,0.0001530987,0.000041912364,0.000013452142,0.0026538284],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9967705,0.00013792721,0.0006814422,0.00034761024,0.0015941052,0.0004684437],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9979895,0.0005658093,0.00028501856,0.00043569223,0.00056049187,0.00016351452],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010139922,0.00021692328,0.00020025927,0.00007590728,0.0055048456,0.00054220174,0.0009669145,0.00008438904,0.00009140204],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0018435158,0.00011275929,0.00008563116,0.00047738245,0.0016146918,0.0007362607,0.00031250046,0.00021697384,0.00009027337],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000617268,0.000056538036,0.00012729058,0.000018181392,0.000038613685,0.000007075544,0.022163836,0.000010288687,0.0006086968,0.96314144,0.011021841,0.0027444407],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011024779,0.000032189586,0.001899442,0.000102035825,0.000023820914,0.0000062708327,0.031104488,0.0000024443257,0.0053512705,0.003078911,0.95807064,0.0002182486],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006637689,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.023903817,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96006256,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002851755,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0025494723,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999772},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7148633020","doi":"10.70675/0816e407z11e3z4b63z8b28z2c3bd4b3de9f","title":"Le contrôle de constitutionnalité des lois pénales a posteriori : essai comparé sur la protection des droits des justiciables en France et au Canada","year":2018,"lang":"","type":"dissertation","venue":"","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Convergence (economics); Protection mechanism; Divergence (linguistics)","score_opus":0.023513283024495138,"score_gpt":0.3211406671392394,"score_spread":0.29762738411474426,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7148633020","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8934374,0.0024886685,0.025480324,0.00023612681,0.0013971304,0.0013905653,0.00011285874,0.00019730322,0.07525964],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98008937,0.000557501,0.004289769,0.000208565,0.00044449215,0.00022106741,0.00006964706,0.00006975931,0.014049827],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9929741,0.001684676,0.001304443,0.0011561433,0.0014909526,0.0013897093],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9926615,0.002125512,0.0010008423,0.0004189986,0.003282875,0.00051030447],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0033526078,0.00084911275,0.001092616,0.00028398144,0.005057543,0.0009913818,0.0010763621,0.00079202256,0.00041261857],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0065662335,0.000886101,0.00021852695,0.0014323053,0.0046453304,0.0014464145,0.0001203733,0.0006349873,0.00004388126],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0019459014,0.0017906209,0.044539675,0.011932907,0.0013315955,0.00019293236,0.2030038,0.002599055,0.005186177,0.55173695,0.0021652577,0.17357513],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0056605777,0.0010252104,0.25492868,0.025208104,0.0018996291,0.0003291661,0.22238193,0.0016609262,0.028841844,0.14116329,0.31007934,0.006821292],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9383137,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9949527,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.41057366,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0018518618,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.040361103,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99935895},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7161021457","doi":"10.1515/9780820375281-010","title":"7 “Schemes of Dev iltry Concocted in Canada”","year":2025,"lang":"","type":"book-chapter","venue":"University of Georgia Press eBooks","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"","score_opus":0.02765042707464906,"score_gpt":0.23844829674050955,"score_spread":0.21079786966586048,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7161021457","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.01154422,0.00084483926,0.000107292966,0.00008294363,0.00048007898,0.0005892706,0.0003643494,0.0000254587,0.98596156],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.45659187,0.0005863949,0.00048158248,0.000043050346,0.000030024681,2.3356162e-7,0.0000102095655,0.000021402964,0.5422352],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.996694,0.00017605988,0.0007520111,0.00070241804,0.0011799093,0.0004955662],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99613404,0.00093184045,0.0011717846,0.00061295746,0.0009533241,0.00019606043],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00042124308,0.00044947222,0.001200936,0.00044040967,0.00030636243,0.000019635683,0.0018428351,0.00061601563,0.00085682794],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00019403014,0.00060805783,0.00023812396,0.00008995915,0.0014578087,0.0001295598,0.00077601976,0.0006262396,0.0000034021546],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008707949,0.0000983255,0.0014091813,0.0017908382,0.0007329326,0.00040169715,0.016903525,0.00012589998,0.0001406695,0.88289094,0.003728423,0.0909068],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00119212,0.00005476153,0.00057922513,0.0021811076,0.0002994668,0.0000010854162,0.0054837903,0.000046785837,0.0010261994,0.0024152137,0.9860824,0.0006378685],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9318399,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.94572854,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9823539,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009196731,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.014928619,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99963707},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7164911899","doi":"10.1080/17153379.2004.12554002","title":"Measuring Judicial Independence: The Political Economy of Judging in Japan.","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Pacific Affairs","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Politics; Judicial activism; Judicial independence; Digital economy","score_opus":0.04226249691629427,"score_gpt":0.30260184555141123,"score_spread":0.260339348635117,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7164911899","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.040589385,0.00011637395,0.00037495708,0.0042332206,0.0002769659,0.00019357348,0.0000018598915,0.000050796232,0.9541629],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9994946,0.000007078265,0.00020915108,0.000042170308,0.00017364645,0.000011280434,3.2710759e-7,0.0000099175495,0.000051805375],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99835306,0.000110646295,0.00031304572,0.00023104288,0.0005121452,0.00048007522],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991917,0.00030183242,0.00009995644,0.00020116515,0.000105790066,0.000099548444],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012454889,0.000097804164,0.00018347614,0.00014190277,0.0002651218,0.00006631571,0.00044231056,0.00011260973,0.00006460479],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00071464793,0.00008097798,0.00006174846,0.00048437229,0.00050200144,0.0002251414,0.00006502349,0.00025573382,0.000054187953],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000012011988,0.00004682333,0.009356844,0.0000120520535,0.0000067713077,0.0000055615988,0.016125022,0.00011972599,0.000026452726,0.9716002,0.000029380666,0.0026591604],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00033770895,0.000021250664,0.0032618914,0.00010047739,0.000008841828,0.000003202736,0.5443662,0.000008951552,0.0007364678,0.4495218,0.001466689,0.00016654709],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004994879,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001201159,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9589052,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00017649909,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00057792355,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3302186},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W85780722","doi":"10.29173/alr144","title":"The Tip of the Iceberg: A Survey of the Philosophy and Practice of Canadian Provincial and Territorial Judges Concerning Judicial Disqualification","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Alberta Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Fredericton; University of Alberta; University of New Brunswick","funders":"","keywords":"Apprehension; Divergence (linguistics); Law; Test (biology); Situated; State (computer science); Common law; Political science; Nationality; Sociology; Psychology; Mathematics; Philosophy; Ecology","score_opus":0.11856524697750082,"score_gpt":0.34989173030337206,"score_spread":0.23132648332587125,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W85780722","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.18505764,0.1275942,0.00000725105,0.06733998,0.005264145,0.006775495,0.00022305585,0.000024061845,0.6077142],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9925899,0.006790985,0.000024411976,0.00036633015,0.00014780328,0.000010871401,9.721531e-7,0.0000065775507,0.00006217348],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9976733,0.0013181117,0.0003887476,0.00014191645,0.00034800143,0.00012993024],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9956249,0.003046124,0.0006398692,0.0002939946,0.00034255846,0.000052581643],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0028799388,0.00007821474,0.00022642339,0.000018227518,0.00045207352,0.000021604586,0.0004583568,0.000056408808,0.000015297595],"category_scores_gemma":[0.014196011,0.000040518593,0.000044066495,0.0004726501,0.000972094,0.00015250429,0.00008272789,0.00009272856,8.7860775e-7],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000906394,0.000049623624,0.024639951,0.0006586304,0.00006379988,1.9526402e-7,0.012149531,9.872056e-8,0.000022798671,0.936911,0.001584803,0.023828933],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002532079,0.00006922056,0.087964244,0.002084159,0.00031518593,0.0000036272374,0.0004758924,0.0000011136445,0.00014151224,0.006735418,0.9017724,0.00018403301],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8396377,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9394381,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9301756,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000020869089,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00050668657,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99410784},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W904336888","doi":"","title":"Reply to Edmond & Roach and Susan Haack's Replies to Law's Treatment of Science: From Idealization to Understanding","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Dalhousie law journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":true,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Idealization; Subject (documents); Law; Psychology; Scientific evidence; Philosophy; Sociology; Epistemology; Psychoanalysis; Political science; Computer science; Library science","score_opus":0.06431148602138019,"score_gpt":0.3498896242850279,"score_spread":0.2855781382636477,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W904336888","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92146903,0.0002234574,0.010467847,0.02000116,0.00081885286,0.00084966427,0.000025490821,0.000083024286,0.04606145],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98786265,0.000080106016,0.009311043,0.0020793234,0.000277211,0.0000116316305,0.0000012881914,0.000016926662,0.00035980126],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99774516,0.00009386877,0.00040121586,0.00038933443,0.00093835633,0.00043204235],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984266,0.00018947365,0.00016917732,0.00027538318,0.000341494,0.0005978389],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00097497046,0.00014230974,0.00025736156,0.0002461759,0.0018958338,0.0010040677,0.00039273102,0.000052841788,0.00024157205],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00036271522,0.000120138444,0.00004185049,0.0009505687,0.0004889245,0.0007031807,0.00011203736,0.00007032618,0.00004095618],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00019910056,0.00031114992,0.006687534,0.000017104605,0.0000831088,0.000037862803,0.17633614,0.0014777988,0.007899274,0.7441628,0.0262106,0.036577556],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001378274,0.0019515066,0.019903826,0.00046505017,0.000110546265,0.000048162456,0.08202669,0.000063834035,0.009886915,0.23415233,0.64901394,0.0009989461],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.017430615,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011752896,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.62280333,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00050749077,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00021800984,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99940354},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}