{"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.006663463,0.026374776,0.105561465,0.76659733,0.011212096,0.00035626188,0.00014324025,0.00040177142,0.08268964],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.31159717,0.015330822,0.12415402,0.4830271,0.022741407,0.0029897704,0.00013874247,0.00088087056,0.039140128],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.83453107,0.11902123,0.004149676,0.010801234,0.027009757,0.004486993],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.58916557,0.3489895,0.01037599,0.025409846,0.023640295,0.002418802],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.15236224,0.0018967476,0.0020005677,0.0039712493,0.0122531,0.02030002,0.00853239,0.020564782,0.004448107],"category_scores_gemma":[0.22958973,0.001241189,0.002893587,0.002915635,0.1291512,0.051554836,0.015128277,0.04566951,0.0015057285],"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":[0.000039758994,0.000024932298,0.00047030114,0.00013937813,0.000025797905,0.00022452918,0.018972777,0.00011591207,0.00018418768,0.9474826,0.02380247,0.008517284],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000043544165,0.00007756089,0.0006918682,0.0010375461,0.0000253794,0.00029989195,0.0062593133,0.00071906456,0.0007477448,0.7598484,0.2301389,0.00011076496],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0077407337,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00634167,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15236224,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008898867,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.013296371,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8057782},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9981938,0.00013802304,0.000035314002,0.00023068178,0.000003910531,0.000026123158,0.00012130609,0.0000026204539,0.0012482057],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99737996,0.0007831167,0.00009830262,0.00012520555,0.000007098547,0.000033171327,0.00017957391,0.000003427576,0.0013901019],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9979309,0.00029354598,0.0002006458,0.00013108773,0.0010527526,0.00039114707],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99204576,0.00096450147,0.0031170675,0.0002824617,0.002467003,0.0011230692],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0017338836,0.00020479824,0.00025574127,0.001500075,0.0026498416,0.0011229289,0.00057993195,0.0005187723,0.002082939],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0073373336,0.00057397044,0.000192926,0.0022475317,0.0011968971,0.00085361407,0.00074945897,0.0005584674,0.0005450483],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009927037,0.00015060951,0.9391402,0.00008799917,0.000019377143,0.00031751522,0.039791975,0.000041715437,0.0009886335,0.00007198549,0.0012442657,0.018046504],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000034607249,0.00008413717,0.9767702,0.00003093186,0.000005083842,0.00007538326,0.020730153,0.000053264368,0.00007978858,0.00001483459,0.0021427856,0.000009912227],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6447194,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7951052,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6447194,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0058843708,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0067012473,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.71474576},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"methods","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11794803,0.01975182,0.33873114,0.3884956,0.002861673,0.0014260937,0.00012462863,0.0002771146,0.13038386],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6549338,0.004018074,0.29315096,0.03899044,0.0006894217,0.0018079461,0.00004850271,0.00007052628,0.0062902695],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.7303111,0.21393222,0.0122302435,0.013725836,0.02207596,0.0077246334],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6505463,0.2767273,0.014169178,0.016813716,0.038214672,0.0035288758],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.36350456,0.0009766193,0.0016508051,0.007464055,0.016460631,0.020943405,0.007382642,0.015986027,0.0021735872],"category_scores_gemma":[0.30502763,0.0013293839,0.0014237163,0.0046699694,0.041424047,0.028076323,0.013119278,0.01672403,0.00039205898],"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":[0.000053269527,0.000058600006,0.0030981076,0.00015908181,0.000033245786,0.00025467743,0.017296918,0.00089819665,0.0002725131,0.94409233,0.0028302083,0.030952737],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001585594,0.00052991626,0.0077891126,0.0026929134,0.00017444247,0.0003959657,0.025506359,0.009872161,0.0035039491,0.8526039,0.09643574,0.00033688828],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.019934032,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.044193313,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.36350456,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.017531637,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.038449388,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7849122},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7180799,0.004059113,0.0807161,0.029119642,0.000662851,0.0012781583,0.00012765218,0.000058891517,0.16589768],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9671234,0.0013402518,0.019221386,0.0017401826,0.00030849845,0.00045023192,0.00006784319,0.00004157665,0.009706636],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9288986,0.061260674,0.0013714037,0.0026061228,0.004851955,0.0010111943],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.3136866,0.6506157,0.01394523,0.008954774,0.009747333,0.0030504311],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08516248,0.0005364461,0.001369857,0.004947556,0.0063476977,0.00989532,0.0030214377,0.0045094052,0.024476465],"category_scores_gemma":[0.351618,0.0008598763,0.00061051524,0.0046592127,0.010297944,0.01483438,0.0054029524,0.0044194423,0.0015068687],"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":[0.003473389,0.0049890913,0.08865756,0.002055721,0.00044967773,0.0013790353,0.09490911,0.0072965715,0.0011216241,0.30426142,0.014399242,0.47700754],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016759804,0.0032613499,0.09089827,0.0033685172,0.00057208695,0.0013439207,0.20676486,0.05746232,0.004726299,0.55863625,0.07088468,0.00040551648],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003008269,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006908996,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08516248,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0032204525,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0054654162,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.45038766},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98124456,0.0005826611,0.0010489335,0.0003318293,0.000113430695,0.00013481577,0.00012600797,0.00003573206,0.016381899],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99726105,0.0001107184,0.0015740325,0.00014490506,0.000044477936,0.00008896167,0.00007817131,0.000033591255,0.00066403777],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99476445,0.0026830693,0.0003168695,0.0010246705,0.0009899117,0.00022094532],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8910093,0.09496154,0.008023518,0.002718614,0.0016067596,0.0016803317],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0055584,0.00048602207,0.0005601347,0.0009493058,0.0009793413,0.0032895945,0.00083730137,0.0016838721,0.018068744],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08510149,0.000665761,0.0004886034,0.00046386072,0.0022983481,0.004197492,0.0027794086,0.0019627558,0.0006080336],"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":[0.1728678,0.009677892,0.28290635,0.009203519,0.0018913448,0.002690523,0.08945713,0.002729806,0.23729104,0.065129,0.005008624,0.121147014],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.006610535,0.011517274,0.89511585,0.0012540631,0.0018098801,0.0018350203,0.009927091,0.008587155,0.020622453,0.034071814,0.008185088,0.00046376273],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010452061,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001259744,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.018068744,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00082462473,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00036041546,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.060445905},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.011260931,0.00950899,0.004105022,0.029879773,0.005459413,0.00012912531,0.00056023884,0.00028339366,0.93881303],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.09697835,0.009539607,0.0031566082,0.009547147,0.0012869432,0.0000807245,0.0008946209,0.00012944968,0.8783866],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99855274,0.000284077,0.000059819602,0.000298589,0.00055658736,0.000248053],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99794513,0.00026554265,0.00015776033,0.0001528488,0.0010940402,0.0003846795],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012348472,0.00041718455,0.0002630391,0.000874957,0.0047131684,0.004964607,0.00096271967,0.0017098254,0.12136336],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003936299,0.00019754765,0.00035202122,0.000996442,0.0019648175,0.002722361,0.0022013213,0.002595676,0.043737207],"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":[0.00010080542,0.000076359145,0.0035949792,0.0003381555,0.000013662945,0.00047658748,0.005064935,0.00020797178,0.0009293616,0.25094455,0.4875023,0.2507503],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000002255392,0.000014643255,0.0012709355,0.000095656644,0.0000029331736,0.0001322713,0.0010613763,0.0000722821,0.0002306769,0.004481379,0.99262697,0.000008526523],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02246756,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.030542804,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.12136336,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004038584,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0049216487,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.40600085},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00027885364,0.78888756,0.021435587,0.08086111,0.01457669,0.0012848491,0.008118905,0.00093042565,0.08362611],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.008880234,0.7723428,0.05193973,0.031870686,0.006295948,0.002984404,0.00460731,0.00090083515,0.12017809],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9826568,0.0055236393,0.004285448,0.0007125058,0.0065970654,0.00022454161],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.93381566,0.036649913,0.0049600457,0.0031885041,0.020247916,0.0011379923],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.026969869,0.0023766558,0.003197818,0.014358461,0.0027106637,0.0077135907,0.0044758716,0.007892067,0.02917042],"category_scores_gemma":[0.092026636,0.0053691855,0.002078918,0.014250852,0.005126963,0.008066157,0.0033685956,0.010048398,0.021493278],"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":[0.000035137153,0.000017350267,0.00022832664,0.0052152714,0.000056059176,0.000207169,0.00060045015,0.0003925319,0.00019741339,0.017974889,0.8660925,0.108982995],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000017102002,0.00002423468,0.0014789279,0.008758201,0.000049400893,0.00032315924,0.00028302113,0.0001740121,0.00011095238,0.018198565,0.9705446,0.00003777093],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.044464756,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.092872426,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.044464756,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0069601596,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.022291621,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14263201},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.057831798,0.014027494,0.0044086333,0.077551045,0.004967109,0.00082186784,0.0050741127,0.00042621235,0.8348918],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5579361,0.017709224,0.015133648,0.01977734,0.0013208353,0.0006924055,0.003590834,0.00026041266,0.3835792],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9914848,0.0009060717,0.00034068766,0.00084515713,0.0047136317,0.0017097085],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98854804,0.0006543084,0.00027656613,0.00032205254,0.0076776585,0.0025213258],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004646111,0.000608925,0.0005886895,0.0056748274,0.019816838,0.006749141,0.00237626,0.0025460918,0.031710755],"category_scores_gemma":[0.019632855,0.00057907775,0.0007134669,0.0036888605,0.0028768089,0.0014168877,0.003920873,0.0025316626,0.0037724588],"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":[0.000184876,0.000057349465,0.019135527,0.00027912247,0.000048807586,0.0007094443,0.0037729256,0.0006860734,0.00067402754,0.11396748,0.61991006,0.24057429],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000047598023,0.00005381355,0.0465056,0.0004252695,0.000059398262,0.00042998258,0.0034039717,0.0005968445,0.00042319763,0.0063520437,0.94154185,0.0001604374],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.96533173,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98764986,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07255956,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.07255956,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.17123404,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.52645886},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8963283,0.001116789,0.00058795896,0.035799194,0.000110054636,0.00005609891,0.000012160759,0.000005713429,0.065983824],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9906499,0.0003894893,0.00024424808,0.0020471355,0.000022974576,0.000015418134,0.0000035038909,0.000003372199,0.0066239294],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9901513,0.0061389743,0.0002536598,0.0005409626,0.0010940075,0.0018212264],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9894611,0.004508675,0.0012412567,0.00025050066,0.0011285864,0.0034098984],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0074712187,0.00011135919,0.00027378823,0.0007966157,0.018321317,0.008343543,0.0011812667,0.0047758548,0.0040393015],"category_scores_gemma":[0.020939259,0.00037688354,0.00021040885,0.00084972766,0.008172663,0.002937107,0.0059683775,0.005164786,0.0002636447],"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":[0.00027370965,0.00062652107,0.044198435,0.00022811584,0.00006615031,0.015446419,0.5999116,0.0015206585,0.0017739481,0.24158911,0.0207032,0.07366216],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008500612,0.0004584707,0.12498017,0.00063030527,0.000070316804,0.0018090619,0.68300056,0.0030935688,0.0011210081,0.048069317,0.13652357,0.00015864341],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.18468945,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.35758373,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.18468945,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.013178863,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.017148774,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.36722893},"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":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.037402555,0.012801232,0.16283381,0.0049992944,0.00041382606,0.00029762462,0.0005152,0.00025965643,0.78047675],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.71740216,0.011495934,0.11120342,0.0010767514,0.00018903513,0.000579485,0.00076080416,0.0002821843,0.1570103],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99594325,0.0030703605,0.00015755139,0.00021101876,0.0005275754,0.00009014086],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99559516,0.0030645113,0.00034073563,0.0005312228,0.0003028514,0.00016552038],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0031840876,0.000695143,0.00025809673,0.0015111091,0.0015280735,0.0062836525,0.00094406615,0.0009691598,0.009089215],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009554863,0.00028441084,0.00018081989,0.0021414184,0.011302521,0.0088216765,0.0024644416,0.0014358308,0.0012426936],"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":[0.000011427235,0.000006989087,0.00017419943,0.00010394803,0.000002953622,0.000102690465,0.014406226,0.00042943857,0.00011236568,0.96252185,0.0032095823,0.01891832],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000065801505,0.000020914267,0.00060491794,0.00046625294,0.0000052752816,0.00031184065,0.012101117,0.0013344007,0.0005202107,0.68582976,0.29878363,0.000015132637],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0017180576,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0021371464,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009089215,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0018648986,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013184124,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.030406415},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.980775,0.0017329213,0.0047707045,0.0010498548,0.00012155848,0.00014482187,0.00016596261,0.0000492038,0.011189788],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9967675,0.00036737227,0.0015109623,0.00012390957,0.0000657979,0.00011969732,0.00010910201,0.000036807975,0.00089883595],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99027646,0.0049856347,0.0012858814,0.00070493657,0.0019310887,0.0008160062],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.56966776,0.37679225,0.027952934,0.0056227264,0.009207497,0.010756938],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01776658,0.00025872793,0.0005070787,0.0017668895,0.0016666823,0.0041360613,0.0008944788,0.001553196,0.012409003],"category_scores_gemma":[0.27504694,0.0004930879,0.0005979144,0.0009846926,0.0010354315,0.0021209752,0.0017727357,0.0024719175,0.0010477484],"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":[0.013431161,0.0027387377,0.75611806,0.0008120824,0.000903148,0.0015660293,0.036329545,0.004573698,0.010785408,0.011034208,0.0030365742,0.15867133],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00028984444,0.0024441935,0.9474093,0.00053804787,0.00039984757,0.0013029274,0.016674386,0.0049953577,0.00247999,0.014093991,0.009170663,0.0002015959],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0027887805,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003102843,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01776658,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000995403,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0040665595,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09395981},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.03110013,0.007658794,0.1020106,0.5589767,0.002354786,0.00038874042,0.00019408364,0.00014553136,0.2971706],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9103028,0.0032498077,0.03669302,0.037517156,0.0036621073,0.00060804153,0.000071080955,0.00017275118,0.0077232188],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.85996616,0.075864725,0.008543747,0.012273088,0.035418164,0.00793406],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.51962066,0.40993774,0.017812865,0.022678968,0.025910523,0.0040392787],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.16951618,0.00096420076,0.0026848784,0.0068131112,0.01451882,0.0317049,0.0072127953,0.024414172,0.008235825],"category_scores_gemma":[0.35226437,0.0012922629,0.0023307975,0.0040859757,0.15135002,0.043723557,0.018420413,0.026092717,0.0012690617],"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":[0.000013398829,0.0000116091205,0.00018339258,0.000028505658,0.000009121396,0.00006104781,0.0012736531,0.00018414002,0.00003217254,0.99499667,0.00092434336,0.0022819492],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003495271,0.000012876275,0.00022647681,0.00015509469,0.000012115397,0.00003457714,0.0006139311,0.0005035666,0.00010125,0.9914614,0.006821326,0.000022387512],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.018402362,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01252461,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9854812,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.018138265,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.035503242,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.89649796},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.22239055,0.008857961,0.0051660677,0.60288125,0.0006476146,0.00017862231,0.0000580717,0.000020139445,0.15979965],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.936835,0.0027584715,0.003421108,0.04139552,0.000238028,0.0001025888,0.000010602065,0.00003095907,0.015207832],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.97713476,0.013373563,0.001009828,0.0017567142,0.0048992834,0.001825869],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94992346,0.035957254,0.0031500068,0.0019121832,0.006742643,0.002314414],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03859573,0.00020283954,0.00040809778,0.0016486116,0.009621586,0.008294786,0.0014634333,0.006430448,0.003299081],"category_scores_gemma":[0.106045954,0.0004917024,0.00046278816,0.0014372419,0.024628907,0.006586311,0.0057873097,0.011314549,0.00035110675],"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":[0.0001178401,0.00006818539,0.018054605,0.00023941274,0.000052984065,0.00086363376,0.104536064,0.00040251645,0.00068363704,0.76416636,0.024306228,0.086508386],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007777741,0.00023073558,0.17033403,0.0022465603,0.00014240648,0.0009431215,0.07278162,0.003219455,0.0012041031,0.488516,0.26009646,0.00020776414],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.17535397,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.30508736,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.17535397,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.014119899,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.030852906,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3486666},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9417905,0.004720093,0.0018797244,0.022259701,0.0004387878,0.00014255207,0.00007847452,0.000023968894,0.028666154],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961338,0.00086385,0.00054718164,0.0009805867,0.00017664595,0.00004532012,0.000018494433,0.0000049600812,0.0012290272],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9806491,0.0131202,0.0014670137,0.0009239831,0.0023757927,0.0014639264],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9603406,0.025207724,0.008412158,0.0011667564,0.0027522193,0.0021205337],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.024633082,0.00013152903,0.0006899866,0.0010715511,0.0037628016,0.003663933,0.00066095154,0.0030010198,0.0032173267],"category_scores_gemma":[0.11187782,0.00024238347,0.00028221673,0.000677496,0.0028146452,0.0019484663,0.0016379132,0.0016590307,0.0007066907],"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":[0.002804711,0.0007550509,0.41872358,0.0012967665,0.0005276169,0.0030582172,0.06969118,0.002166576,0.0067618294,0.073960155,0.0270404,0.39321375],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000508349,0.0016846268,0.7614304,0.0015362262,0.00047773463,0.0013303866,0.08817382,0.0038302601,0.004819977,0.050120864,0.085827745,0.00025959816],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00445132,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.016827974,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.024633082,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012444841,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0042163744,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.13027376},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.017356252,0.0052700276,0.25373667,0.06361197,0.019047963,0.0017862644,0.0046424367,0.005162372,0.62938607],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5230256,0.0057433527,0.17410664,0.03176343,0.007605688,0.0059969397,0.004647909,0.0038242543,0.24328624],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.96768624,0.02073193,0.0040543163,0.0013882597,0.0048405766,0.0012985842],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9207109,0.045794215,0.0045446977,0.0066290004,0.02043403,0.0018870771],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016414661,0.00095991377,0.00058911025,0.0023084525,0.0030815746,0.0067360057,0.0022050354,0.0038360734,0.059066333],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10712885,0.0007840781,0.00046076227,0.0012477088,0.0036916828,0.0043688114,0.004213839,0.005507088,0.024340618],"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":[0.00066157844,0.00007680817,0.000978962,0.00095946976,0.000016572008,0.0005876887,0.009488969,0.0008901271,0.0024205165,0.53352505,0.29014066,0.16025364],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010184518,0.00013180097,0.0010209642,0.0018186981,0.00002054685,0.00038344663,0.0021759712,0.0017285213,0.003541813,0.07816325,0.91079175,0.00012144599],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0021314817,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0016154082,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.059066333,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0032613163,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006867569,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.19759655},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.052609574,0.19410238,0.042348396,0.2113614,0.0024109788,0.00033916582,0.00020805106,0.00006472615,0.49655533],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8396347,0.082380675,0.01636238,0.029202042,0.00544966,0.0007281662,0.00015064783,0.00016600067,0.02592576],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9691049,0.021480208,0.0009173593,0.001192691,0.00425156,0.0030531655],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8921041,0.09844841,0.0037067279,0.0017636619,0.0023551455,0.0016220032],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.026534768,0.0008608929,0.001989971,0.0062533785,0.0073775556,0.018281616,0.0032951478,0.015376,0.007850346],"category_scores_gemma":[0.054328855,0.0011863998,0.0013885682,0.007384631,0.038722817,0.028216645,0.0058494424,0.011447803,0.0008629453],"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":[0.000017916194,0.000047175254,0.0005326225,0.00010445119,0.0000055425403,0.00015701902,0.0058188373,0.0005195882,0.000033856242,0.980537,0.003872874,0.008353072],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000055122902,0.000069613336,0.0041584857,0.00083386526,0.000014768427,0.00016772773,0.013223197,0.0021881717,0.000105670726,0.8747673,0.10435244,0.00006365256],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.040672928,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.049458336,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.040672928,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.013708812,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.015800029,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14033091},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5683828,0.07510702,0.019723885,0.018446913,0.0014620341,0.00020768329,0.00016118871,0.000021627056,0.3164869],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97903377,0.0074045956,0.0035364819,0.0012416913,0.00039331414,0.00008324162,0.000046912406,0.000016189286,0.008243825],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.96883184,0.023813209,0.001556585,0.0013112862,0.0025749211,0.0019121106],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.975578,0.016535217,0.002982569,0.00076493656,0.0032182345,0.0009210377],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.036437973,0.00038531228,0.00069228467,0.00436966,0.00562227,0.007453405,0.0011905925,0.0020118877,0.007874788],"category_scores_gemma":[0.047507387,0.00028733964,0.00027675173,0.004320286,0.009526404,0.0050269566,0.004357489,0.0015442858,0.00071905105],"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":[0.0005122453,0.00016153538,0.042273626,0.0013729224,0.00008752542,0.0021234022,0.20503761,0.0008998325,0.0010817392,0.53263545,0.005390499,0.20842369],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010312142,0.00070826645,0.16816589,0.008078286,0.00011612455,0.0029655835,0.3332624,0.0012602306,0.0019284846,0.11998069,0.36325914,0.0001718406],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005687597,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01004496,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.036437973,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0032677522,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005196544,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.19270474},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92302996,0.0038191862,0.006422326,0.0048387544,0.00030546947,0.00045846083,0.00013182206,0.000046829093,0.060947135],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99064004,0.00079189835,0.0014530092,0.00044560325,0.000109517445,0.00017015715,0.00004646566,0.000009317545,0.0063340724],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.98580116,0.0073047755,0.0009504245,0.0012450484,0.0020299782,0.002668515],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9887291,0.006255089,0.0021149917,0.00059548597,0.0011908407,0.0011145596],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012963423,0.00021750378,0.00074183877,0.0018901232,0.00543197,0.0049360082,0.0011803422,0.003778966,0.004676908],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03476932,0.0004650149,0.0003879372,0.0011025461,0.0028337422,0.0020066001,0.0040515317,0.002182787,0.0009342391],"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":[0.0021207721,0.0013352754,0.18164892,0.0007520138,0.00026416552,0.013130281,0.061413474,0.006478376,0.007531942,0.42223564,0.030694468,0.27239466],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0011188032,0.002812955,0.33405247,0.0016868518,0.00040019615,0.0048008473,0.0886099,0.0284845,0.013667152,0.2964299,0.22737019,0.00056627986],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003502518,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006794947,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.012963423,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002508356,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005541373,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06855798},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.07639517,0.023184996,0.0027583726,0.8372959,0.006967075,0.00019716733,0.00009666615,0.00009861192,0.053006027],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.71582437,0.011652092,0.0032931902,0.25038213,0.004420061,0.00031301897,0.00011117437,0.00015679789,0.013847231],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.91855913,0.056532644,0.002858195,0.004079351,0.011616703,0.0063539795],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.92175514,0.041211624,0.0063754455,0.0017940298,0.019812806,0.009050907],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.052736767,0.0005427801,0.00060314545,0.0024516108,0.035915054,0.017856186,0.0032294302,0.014970911,0.0048436304],"category_scores_gemma":[0.17009188,0.0012837315,0.0005603899,0.002667004,0.027312065,0.0127945645,0.0062281624,0.018896088,0.002326849],"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":[0.00010290648,0.000113093105,0.017172035,0.0004969747,0.00007051551,0.0011563887,0.34853294,0.00018230175,0.00070756103,0.08439373,0.4653397,0.08173186],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001396435,0.0002073974,0.0396784,0.0045897407,0.00012651618,0.00081115623,0.523218,0.0005968436,0.0010296946,0.069295906,0.3599084,0.00039830044],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.13983038,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.27643302,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.13983038,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.014514066,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03171664,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.27890205},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0046730693,0.012670827,0.075747065,0.054510877,0.0036175314,0.00008892835,0.00044086436,0.0001952462,0.8480556],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8287232,0.0079822,0.024611305,0.009946915,0.0039397115,0.0004597008,0.00036666205,0.00029444203,0.123675935],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9953791,0.0018286139,0.00022656609,0.0008885703,0.0011701544,0.0005069755],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99548644,0.0026723521,0.0003728635,0.00062075595,0.0006534685,0.00019410466],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005072468,0.0005214322,0.00061949936,0.001985906,0.003153981,0.006386456,0.0015040467,0.004707436,0.038022377],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012282874,0.00038772888,0.0008340243,0.0015707496,0.017702328,0.014685802,0.0022954282,0.006131141,0.0055285804],"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":[0.0000022988675,7.789473e-7,0.0000069073426,0.00001031566,0.000001215166,0.0000035171352,0.00007886609,0.000028937968,0.000010984064,0.99704653,0.0017260832,0.0010835234],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000041347034,0.0000065268987,0.00008882166,0.000038729297,0.0000035760909,0.000027021219,0.00009115409,0.00023674869,0.00008565463,0.96991235,0.029499723,0.000005604757],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0022672478,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011856463,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.038022377,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004426003,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001987149,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1271975},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.17776075,0.021470113,0.39261088,0.18220021,0.0015076578,0.00028816194,0.00031581675,0.00028820263,0.22355819],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9781885,0.0015884492,0.014988571,0.0029897385,0.00048432912,0.00008556535,0.00002099222,0.00002411319,0.0016297309],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9508871,0.02941879,0.002544477,0.0046523064,0.010530711,0.0019665824],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8394582,0.14132552,0.0067010457,0.0056577157,0.0050372696,0.0018201334],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.052880522,0.0005546047,0.0019738737,0.0047672316,0.004791962,0.013803847,0.0029334119,0.008928979,0.0045788884],"category_scores_gemma":[0.15023921,0.0012685771,0.000978951,0.0031825725,0.047308695,0.022588361,0.007847033,0.010016605,0.00028624455],"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":[0.000008957438,0.0000077736195,0.00025493614,0.000030157811,0.000012867908,0.00004517847,0.00039971396,0.0005846545,0.000028936314,0.99607253,0.00026784453,0.002286642],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008862918,0.0000035451926,0.000110098124,0.000019245537,0.000004398309,0.000011534197,0.00007486883,0.00069622457,0.0000326636,0.99825364,0.00077701325,0.000007843691],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004583405,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0026788013,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.052880522,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008775732,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0089785615,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2796623},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9981863,0.00008008719,0.00016595291,0.00009171093,0.00001381261,0.000018174922,0.000007960446,0.0000034895081,0.0014324869],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987754,0.00010858147,0.000407516,0.000111370435,0.000024194022,0.000033373137,0.0000147785395,0.000007276788,0.00051746075],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9945484,0.0038808994,0.00028769617,0.00039708545,0.00063945586,0.0002463846],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95851827,0.029210057,0.007861737,0.0011650916,0.0017222789,0.0015225607],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0055068736,0.00028054486,0.00036206798,0.00065030437,0.0014377026,0.0016742798,0.00021741606,0.00060507376,0.0040201214],"category_scores_gemma":[0.054452866,0.00034626797,0.00022961767,0.00018511592,0.0009412393,0.00068160944,0.0011242608,0.0008385357,0.00047718678],"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":[0.011380183,0.0019132574,0.5261923,0.00065390137,0.00061048707,0.0016316632,0.1635175,0.0004894252,0.17527081,0.0015752336,0.0021028977,0.114662334],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001815164,0.0017957807,0.94163203,0.00017707939,0.00028118448,0.00080469524,0.04096191,0.0010969235,0.008632108,0.0009307881,0.0033862188,0.00011972949],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0012762649,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0028522955,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0055068736,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00030748852,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003843218,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.029123485},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.28444076,0.021353744,0.10262207,0.04104259,0.0030319165,0.0030975165,0.0008617453,0.00033237535,0.5432173],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.95069104,0.0034956508,0.01630913,0.002876593,0.00067973725,0.00085682457,0.00034251728,0.00007148057,0.024676913],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9132027,0.06393467,0.0035509767,0.0028499968,0.014221406,0.0022402233],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.76887345,0.19263642,0.015513407,0.0052981446,0.013210426,0.004468183],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.056421045,0.0003342757,0.0009351751,0.0026299148,0.0038605367,0.005070925,0.0011441289,0.0018425015,0.023469996],"category_scores_gemma":[0.25451782,0.00046909295,0.0004632686,0.0019589858,0.003236649,0.002190436,0.0052828547,0.0036628281,0.0036821403],"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":[0.0012376249,0.0011131482,0.050716154,0.0010659382,0.00021685773,0.00092845946,0.007953282,0.007559539,0.00056462525,0.31869552,0.05802028,0.5519286],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00026394028,0.0009977511,0.06960318,0.0040734946,0.00017366688,0.0014406508,0.0104902135,0.02469727,0.0017626387,0.77154535,0.11469205,0.00025987675],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0014645326,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0027430505,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.056421045,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002037251,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009225477,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.29838657},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9969116,0.00012075946,0.000111170135,0.00042520222,0.000024602938,0.000026378113,0.000012100749,0.0000017545228,0.0023664364],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99886525,0.00013919424,0.00039559943,0.00007150701,0.000019388699,0.000014980096,0.000013774198,0.0000023109133,0.00047793635],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99706024,0.0017291171,0.00025609392,0.0001316408,0.00043700606,0.00038583268],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97951674,0.012232414,0.004570429,0.0006283273,0.0012982973,0.0017537613],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005792709,0.00025111137,0.00016251668,0.0014587805,0.0015394628,0.0020931622,0.0008157954,0.0016545816,0.004451559],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07029947,0.00041665017,0.00028113148,0.00031335495,0.0007027334,0.0012287983,0.001607645,0.0018540606,0.00042955516],"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":[0.0005243994,0.0007755936,0.94751906,0.00007726288,0.00005675392,0.0058423257,0.015850622,0.00014355613,0.0027377456,0.002240605,0.00065172184,0.023580343],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026718628,0.00074900995,0.91238964,0.00035050474,0.00006888588,0.010847232,0.066660136,0.0013503938,0.002276125,0.0021059036,0.003129976,0.000045555105],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001413268,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0040307394,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.005792709,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004984765,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011659969,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.030635118},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.40369838,0.021096766,0.10060941,0.08563334,0.0020630988,0.0007124673,0.00024814898,0.00013155185,0.38580674],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97612995,0.0022661642,0.006038153,0.0021666372,0.0005433558,0.00026132676,0.00003593194,0.000032772485,0.012525784],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9742622,0.016678447,0.0010121968,0.0025706931,0.0033316994,0.0021447607],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9758908,0.017781757,0.002569954,0.0012357696,0.0013337781,0.0011879159],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.026339103,0.00024037962,0.0008085473,0.001589259,0.0049050427,0.00788043,0.0013586973,0.00426928,0.005707569],"category_scores_gemma":[0.056462985,0.00052329636,0.0005237722,0.00090905995,0.009646777,0.0036952752,0.0043695807,0.0048183287,0.0009775092],"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":[0.00021989505,0.00009097458,0.0067037125,0.00019249441,0.000060067025,0.0003782636,0.010963352,0.001677004,0.0012367876,0.9217681,0.004493911,0.052215453],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00017692518,0.00030051792,0.027366048,0.00075685733,0.000076454424,0.0005064836,0.011546338,0.0054128957,0.0017268042,0.80818623,0.14376748,0.00017699826],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0030668378,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003215388,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.026339103,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0033370466,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009091067,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.13929611},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3172034,0.28638142,0.025449047,0.24771461,0.0019296338,0.00015357694,0.00042313122,0.00017497731,0.12057022],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.92311287,0.05293254,0.006014255,0.007616123,0.002437257,0.00008073953,0.00014729761,0.00003067188,0.00762827],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99690586,0.00088579446,0.00028454204,0.0005714368,0.0010536927,0.00029870128],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98646563,0.008080989,0.0017550522,0.0006585427,0.0021317643,0.00090797583],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008014094,0.0002689922,0.00068040384,0.0052391174,0.0027443706,0.0060464046,0.0012749721,0.0022505587,0.0041941227],"category_scores_gemma":[0.010821838,0.00034441391,0.00047146887,0.0068322914,0.01092107,0.0071684946,0.002701302,0.0027041184,0.00018259298],"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":[0.000068944304,0.00006257123,0.015282881,0.0011682719,0.00004482763,0.00051440764,0.0058969986,0.0017856268,0.0006106633,0.8190051,0.007412855,0.14814685],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000081726765,0.00026832492,0.10257158,0.0014930195,0.00010127959,0.0006696761,0.0063337944,0.00861306,0.0013254796,0.4229335,0.45542586,0.00018275621],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01592959,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.019722968,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01592959,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.015038999,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.014067695,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10911608},"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":"methods","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":"methods","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0006784752,0.9987679,0.00013008856,0.00012773654,0.000046777113,0.000045121964,0.00006933744,0.000003756932,0.00013080814],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.024629824,0.9735806,0.0010050865,0.00030455232,0.00007438577,0.00017067617,0.00016470783,0.0000064142855,0.00006377873],"study_design_codex":"systematic_review","study_design_gemma":"meta_analysis","domain_scores_codex":[0.9892308,0.006389466,0.002054933,0.0006065748,0.0016324648,0.00008570773],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9528531,0.038673997,0.004914327,0.0008448892,0.002408699,0.0003050406],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.018487025,0.001067591,0.0059944624,0.0057305563,0.00041802844,0.0017170347,0.0020005913,0.0013404634,0.0023336057],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06798854,0.0007445485,0.006033731,0.0062083164,0.00078649586,0.0012864101,0.001021455,0.0009405916,0.0002579405],"study_design_candidate":"meta_analysis","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":[0.0011054935,0.00006759077,0.003322673,0.6126086,0.060712267,0.00008996942,0.00035595664,0.00037456007,0.00025585393,0.0005931258,0.0048510893,0.3156628],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013055636,0.0012029784,0.023066116,0.56902725,0.34901887,0.00086549297,0.0006006082,0.0005695991,0.0010250506,0.0024247356,0.050781038,0.00011266168],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0037173105,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011864682,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.98151296,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002149712,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0042571914,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09776986},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.10900696,0.005474879,0.06969726,0.039804693,0.0006430459,0.00016631777,0.00019721116,0.00015945491,0.77485013],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.90405697,0.0024333682,0.0096937185,0.002713966,0.00026693317,0.00014355812,0.00006724392,0.00012869007,0.08049564],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9909508,0.003893567,0.00038827246,0.0009909727,0.0027413953,0.0010350087],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98690873,0.00793338,0.0015375204,0.0013854756,0.0018301767,0.00040470733],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0067056795,0.0006449057,0.0006063169,0.0019053257,0.0055579157,0.013635354,0.0016016092,0.004059781,0.012620278],"category_scores_gemma":[0.017857192,0.00063677446,0.0008767324,0.0017410584,0.026743231,0.011727898,0.004468488,0.0074241725,0.0012539105],"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":[0.000010824725,0.00000778282,0.00034870752,0.000022797429,0.000003261023,0.00009516873,0.0053277584,0.0001805138,0.00009084789,0.9908573,0.000616011,0.0024388628],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000028725863,0.000049289687,0.0039931275,0.0003305589,0.000029218885,0.00033119347,0.012332192,0.0016221225,0.0011757768,0.8402775,0.13974416,0.00008617673],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.017506506,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.019846156,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9824935,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009498131,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.011022019,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.068914115},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0003688211,0.99892324,0.00012524056,0.0003252734,0.000041434127,0.000019083735,0.00007748877,0.0000025587185,0.00011689669],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.008830307,0.98981375,0.00058610825,0.0004325371,0.00008631215,0.00007435381,0.00012033727,0.0000034123252,0.000052855896],"study_design_codex":"systematic_review","study_design_gemma":"meta_analysis","domain_scores_codex":[0.9905428,0.0044122576,0.0025095097,0.0008713098,0.0015304604,0.00013365522],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.92890453,0.053795878,0.008069253,0.001658388,0.0069930605,0.00057884335],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.025400551,0.0011044666,0.005739804,0.0102865435,0.000435799,0.0028806524,0.0020041515,0.0015871185,0.0021486967],"category_scores_gemma":[0.094895855,0.0011137049,0.004122083,0.009841953,0.0009350392,0.002988136,0.0011902994,0.0016347995,0.00041025382],"study_design_candidate":"meta_analysis","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":[0.00050807477,0.00003827765,0.004578394,0.5002795,0.03134619,0.0001498675,0.0007756271,0.00032870055,0.00043117793,0.0010550525,0.007298663,0.45321047],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00033357574,0.00071527046,0.022931397,0.7051695,0.14399348,0.00080040656,0.0011484522,0.0003096771,0.000979544,0.0032131735,0.12030054,0.00010501312],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0065188636,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.018911714,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.025400551,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002391036,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007841037,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.13433254},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.01191034,0.15116225,0.0031774405,0.7082798,0.012845044,0.00020514715,0.001551424,0.00006178909,0.110806756],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.3642206,0.38294843,0.02193774,0.15223864,0.010821744,0.0005991585,0.0012880524,0.00035281765,0.06559277],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9796,0.005023564,0.0007236285,0.002003038,0.011465343,0.0011843921],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.90668166,0.0359899,0.0018542547,0.0020000425,0.044487976,0.008986078],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.019819636,0.0006806763,0.0014756072,0.008664699,0.025252083,0.010648165,0.002998681,0.0038162537,0.005686101],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08769226,0.0009759254,0.00035590943,0.010796967,0.012670424,0.0045640185,0.004324885,0.0071660313,0.0009382622],"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":[0.00009451091,0.00007480159,0.01085605,0.0009129697,0.00007494447,0.0001843589,0.027370745,0.00047798452,0.00023382578,0.15067615,0.65549153,0.1535522],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003081062,0.000019151612,0.019366246,0.0023079666,0.000046891597,0.00010798781,0.014623088,0.00039778757,0.0001638797,0.03260754,0.9301271,0.00020150223],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9767899,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9853735,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1096741,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1096741,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.23277219,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.795745},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9962412,0.000082723,0.00007749467,0.00012485085,0.000012049557,0.000022538281,0.000054161326,0.0000031219986,0.0033818227],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9980332,0.000082444625,0.0001824393,0.00006469783,0.000007733291,0.000011248127,0.00011232729,0.000002918189,0.0015029275],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99804354,0.00043131408,0.00008803149,0.00013685026,0.0010434681,0.00025677614],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99057907,0.0017021769,0.00223056,0.00048761297,0.0038109813,0.0011895582],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0025001823,0.00021685481,0.00032967338,0.0009782405,0.0035854604,0.0013716487,0.00040966723,0.00053033535,0.0038993647],"category_scores_gemma":[0.018838955,0.00017030266,0.00026651117,0.0006854345,0.0016556329,0.00036632546,0.0011795851,0.0006198768,0.00027227763],"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":[0.0021846495,0.00043031247,0.87399787,0.00015890448,0.0001882551,0.0007654695,0.057803597,0.00051526097,0.01182494,0.0014642054,0.0047520427,0.045914486],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000033209537,0.00013969849,0.98316437,0.0000403322,0.000026426047,0.00016036823,0.01172168,0.00033410353,0.0011932243,0.0001736425,0.0029622398,0.000050644587],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7164713,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8904002,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.2835287,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006733324,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0068163103,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5703969},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99733514,0.0002865819,0.00018950057,0.000367337,0.00002518466,0.000034427383,0.0000145395825,0.000006331311,0.0017409272],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991128,0.00012130088,0.0002921265,0.00010690063,0.000014785379,0.000018275397,0.000016938739,0.0000028300778,0.000314093],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9877344,0.009346045,0.0009676145,0.00034993328,0.0010637336,0.0005381966],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.91394144,0.069680855,0.008532513,0.0019292197,0.0037382715,0.0021776205],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010967152,0.0002654456,0.0005405379,0.0014550532,0.0021059327,0.0024192159,0.0007614651,0.002144305,0.004136236],"category_scores_gemma":[0.17944601,0.0005914183,0.00038753764,0.00040622128,0.0012022972,0.0009968821,0.0023112427,0.0016664863,0.0004712422],"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":[0.0142660765,0.0026000177,0.650194,0.0010333648,0.0006345037,0.022672234,0.121013165,0.0037613006,0.01855423,0.0068254424,0.00766466,0.15078099],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001804489,0.002923423,0.9117816,0.00062546437,0.00029237618,0.012376575,0.043803845,0.0068437727,0.0074428297,0.00822261,0.005264412,0.00024254722],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0027567912,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0046926937,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010967152,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0013531292,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016128308,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.058000505},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99251914,0.0003845831,0.002634261,0.0003328889,0.000041657826,0.00006820227,0.000024454319,0.000015665159,0.0039791143],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99501485,0.00018437902,0.0041170516,0.00010108034,0.000034977,0.000044987788,0.000031828553,0.000009081454,0.00046180538],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9783862,0.015051934,0.001681286,0.00081218535,0.0035769977,0.00049138593],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.64895064,0.30691874,0.028976407,0.0041657947,0.008292268,0.0026961903],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.019925283,0.00036597377,0.00037353914,0.0007511818,0.00078816223,0.0021502941,0.00034275648,0.000809708,0.0036832127],"category_scores_gemma":[0.22884572,0.00030048052,0.00044975296,0.00029229713,0.0009444877,0.0009290742,0.0009945186,0.0009487099,0.0005399112],"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":[0.027940711,0.0023062294,0.4534645,0.0014389474,0.0011036759,0.0024925862,0.018566128,0.00824072,0.11981885,0.0059051076,0.0024805444,0.35624203],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008159051,0.010682152,0.86984503,0.00087361044,0.00094049604,0.0026686743,0.015686773,0.02155939,0.058141485,0.009832013,0.008475479,0.00047899815],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00089785765,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0016173158,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.019925283,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006091401,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009412815,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10537624},"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":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.003570967,0.7328554,0.022609442,0.11038429,0.00979818,0.00017436303,0.00008325685,0.0000714704,0.12045261],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.09550643,0.76019174,0.023633244,0.05595073,0.016811006,0.00048671284,0.00017461335,0.0001761306,0.04706937],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98649246,0.0062144236,0.0013682303,0.0009558689,0.004386652,0.0005823305],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97300357,0.023294384,0.0011698599,0.0004712805,0.0017769596,0.00028396506],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.015039104,0.00064434053,0.0014625075,0.007299816,0.004743333,0.013333659,0.002441291,0.006810108,0.0032659355],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04773856,0.0010657539,0.0006547319,0.0067508477,0.023639899,0.022969408,0.0040217964,0.0083159,0.0012042044],"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":[0.000017135044,0.000015349679,0.000247159,0.0008737131,0.000018021896,0.00035212078,0.0041782013,0.00020470827,0.000058221234,0.8810467,0.038365528,0.07462305],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000006706552,0.000020029038,0.00053769746,0.0044683265,0.000019188235,0.00043003057,0.0021282649,0.00012113074,0.00013372603,0.31084898,0.6812547,0.00003119278],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0074357977,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011454566,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.015039104,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0047046063,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008265033,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.079535306},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.013854834,0.008475616,0.34854323,0.46030977,0.00705861,0.00021687915,0.00029625467,0.00027825416,0.1609666],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.49431962,0.006918509,0.3082254,0.11353414,0.016758505,0.00076576346,0.00021570717,0.0005715968,0.058690675],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9728573,0.014678264,0.0017329521,0.0031132228,0.006273222,0.0013449795],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94602203,0.036601312,0.0019960098,0.006549878,0.0072265286,0.0016043086],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.04144829,0.00085225597,0.0018696534,0.0038979833,0.008412799,0.012347271,0.009161079,0.014688934,0.006808686],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0709488,0.0007601583,0.0014984224,0.0029240418,0.046409152,0.033123724,0.0059218016,0.025180327,0.0010966338],"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":[0.0000047172916,0.0000071651043,0.00010800063,0.000017225704,0.000003400905,0.000069621274,0.0007550388,0.00023849164,0.000039317456,0.9885145,0.005364438,0.004878064],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000010260747,0.0000105437175,0.0001110897,0.000113670554,0.000007186817,0.00009527804,0.0004446337,0.0013389833,0.00008700683,0.9410196,0.056739062,0.000022769],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.014821569,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.035724636,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04144829,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01181179,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.013498835,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21920216},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.89562094,0.001634343,0.0005234371,0.02812557,0.000074354655,0.00017925205,0.00023483498,0.0000060429525,0.07360132],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99511755,0.0008935363,0.00033283257,0.0016962477,0.000016860644,0.00005818634,0.00004919174,0.0000037434866,0.0018319493],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9850572,0.004560071,0.00059687125,0.0010577389,0.005709498,0.0030186195],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.87886703,0.06544621,0.015374383,0.0037411484,0.028595997,0.007975277],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.028441884,0.00020952459,0.0005598192,0.004567998,0.01836306,0.0072809015,0.0019732632,0.0024233954,0.0064861304],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10566242,0.0004895059,0.00034057233,0.005866192,0.019037794,0.004489184,0.004862193,0.005539371,0.00019768842],"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":[0.000104605875,0.00033898736,0.20432608,0.0002513827,0.000036812966,0.0004825307,0.6272749,0.00030034594,0.0004542048,0.12316121,0.009678385,0.033590637],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004104292,0.000091316324,0.3584403,0.00068289175,0.00004933372,0.00011908452,0.55807096,0.0006709153,0.0004336235,0.012671988,0.06859937,0.00012913713],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.95655,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9772867,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8887583,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.11124172,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.14750163,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.80711895},"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":"reproducibility","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":"reproducibility","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.85380113,0.00071012235,0.12965742,0.0015796683,0.0005466763,0.0051822723,0.00065022206,0.00026988494,0.0076026856],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.925754,0.00023103216,0.0653998,0.000513229,0.00012594466,0.0064433594,0.0005295989,0.000069058064,0.0009340015],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.93605137,0.046965,0.003419715,0.006080821,0.0064172577,0.0010657883],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.42846707,0.44804642,0.017585047,0.079068035,0.023332894,0.0035005645],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.17895624,0.0023617088,0.0024241104,0.0014629178,0.0027084937,0.0032775218,0.005910901,0.0027788589,0.0056511667],"category_scores_gemma":[0.3711594,0.0017063121,0.003661946,0.001528721,0.0052898154,0.0056738616,0.0039898427,0.0048366114,0.001022906],"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":[0.037446193,0.01760398,0.5589244,0.004373229,0.0065364563,0.00376235,0.04018403,0.047787253,0.020321932,0.09454148,0.0067580715,0.16176073],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.013394431,0.019643988,0.36544386,0.0015610107,0.004719084,0.0034063724,0.00736482,0.3588969,0.01568579,0.1879868,0.02039967,0.0014972845],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011267615,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0058701895,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8210437,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0035759485,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004898979,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.94642234},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"methods","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":"methods","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3627018,0.0025631373,0.5931379,0.002677577,0.0004298647,0.018917622,0.001346728,0.0016837333,0.016541637],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.25486767,0.0013398433,0.72819394,0.0004279088,0.000046745638,0.01087131,0.0004331868,0.0001263804,0.0036929718],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.96407163,0.028546344,0.0015793559,0.0009325495,0.004497395,0.00037273814],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9065148,0.073297456,0.0032347692,0.007862383,0.008298528,0.00079205266],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.048036776,0.001337817,0.0006536919,0.0022809284,0.0013522202,0.0013786501,0.0017696855,0.0019920934,0.003460127],"category_scores_gemma":[0.12805648,0.0005539337,0.0008016862,0.0020263186,0.0019005158,0.0015140134,0.001993148,0.0015147288,0.0011654445],"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":[0.00231601,0.0047443435,0.037603218,0.0026211163,0.0001953197,0.000650055,0.029109642,0.0026684224,0.036592755,0.008282821,0.010649703,0.8645665],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.003946345,0.034722358,0.41821697,0.0053980877,0.0010915856,0.010350818,0.034538686,0.08004536,0.1967986,0.04549773,0.16621104,0.0031824869],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0051233983,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.014683717,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.048036776,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0013349024,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0031464263,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.25404572},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.968901,0.0014667077,0.0075532626,0.004593739,0.00007996691,0.00015608428,0.00010290845,0.00007161772,0.017074721],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99577147,0.0005497522,0.0018991212,0.00040499712,0.00004073361,0.000080602265,0.00010479494,0.000031295494,0.00111725],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.95667005,0.03208424,0.0026981335,0.0017057193,0.0057551754,0.001086664],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.77859753,0.18233952,0.020725364,0.003693093,0.012731296,0.0019132089],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.028732896,0.00036237738,0.00057974906,0.0032588865,0.0021366563,0.006342025,0.0011123016,0.0020327535,0.0054775807],"category_scores_gemma":[0.32013965,0.00047630127,0.00048625984,0.0010758968,0.0027322464,0.0057139043,0.004051557,0.0023236787,0.0006956281],"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":[0.0007965169,0.00037066528,0.10518342,0.00072607707,0.00011739105,0.0009466282,0.7457641,0.00088739325,0.006582483,0.010974955,0.0035102689,0.124140084],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002415616,0.0017051684,0.2546631,0.002965144,0.00019726431,0.001991294,0.63575375,0.0066748424,0.0077270158,0.041093532,0.046466623,0.00052068516],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002861082,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001963563,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.028732896,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0015953743,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0021640768,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1519559},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.26989108,0.034171592,0.11794363,0.2864814,0.0029910163,0.00029404098,0.0076931743,0.0007230229,0.27981097],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8886628,0.014931281,0.030365258,0.01454583,0.00045242914,0.00020320633,0.0018772422,0.00035084062,0.048610993],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97915375,0.007532546,0.0011802875,0.002730489,0.008481525,0.0009214034],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.89368373,0.07075292,0.0068754787,0.007871135,0.019548558,0.0012681646],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.026298173,0.0006216271,0.001045606,0.007053839,0.0063593686,0.011814401,0.0018232752,0.00223787,0.0130805075],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10943515,0.00060402474,0.00078109885,0.011101337,0.017286278,0.007600807,0.005074244,0.0039893975,0.0012530581],"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":[0.00021241263,0.00005304075,0.076047614,0.0011946531,0.0003645947,0.001091181,0.11620586,0.0015985408,0.0020177804,0.5313306,0.024273612,0.24561015],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000039643524,0.000072434814,0.07132767,0.0037319972,0.00031278277,0.0017702751,0.07950035,0.0019932135,0.0032510124,0.26720423,0.57045054,0.00034579495],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.43962705,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.43160388,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.99364066,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.018117089,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.025319876,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.87413627},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.07519246,0.01951959,0.42594117,0.2972866,0.0017627159,0.00028277532,0.00026369977,0.0001499962,0.17960101],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.93034303,0.0041363323,0.04753083,0.01262845,0.0012949209,0.00025309317,0.000104420455,0.000051891715,0.003656999],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9554602,0.031172894,0.0017510939,0.0041907066,0.005932357,0.001492813],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7864114,0.19378789,0.007955257,0.0071513345,0.0038797678,0.00081439334],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.052984405,0.00070614245,0.0015306917,0.004476915,0.0059666377,0.009078077,0.0035961475,0.008776271,0.0038512908],"category_scores_gemma":[0.12202151,0.000928675,0.001693951,0.0023437599,0.0669281,0.026938148,0.007185221,0.009081917,0.00033645701],"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":[0.000019248173,0.000013589978,0.0008273196,0.00006935904,0.000022119086,0.0001648818,0.0029730212,0.00042037724,0.000048783008,0.98941326,0.0008154454,0.00521257],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000016497064,0.000008505699,0.00035594634,0.000099532925,0.000018039997,0.0001209332,0.0006439159,0.0011120063,0.00015665598,0.99093574,0.006515945,0.000016277492],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0063381405,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0045093475,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.052984405,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005426341,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00702762,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.28021163},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.007712788,0.042513266,0.005498633,0.8583188,0.0013894237,0.00004435716,0.0002066857,0.00005438828,0.08426165],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5684222,0.07325331,0.017833907,0.31250158,0.0030609642,0.00017366582,0.00027889083,0.00018980229,0.024285674],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9139148,0.0200765,0.0030368795,0.008063138,0.044373363,0.010535297],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8686313,0.060616627,0.003641439,0.004737683,0.052342005,0.010030923],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.06531967,0.00077076454,0.0017852129,0.0102924965,0.027295519,0.03168588,0.008357217,0.014766187,0.0058029313],"category_scores_gemma":[0.12779279,0.0010839604,0.0012167877,0.014791945,0.061436605,0.015739717,0.008819146,0.02496948,0.00054804055],"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":[0.000064991036,0.00002987289,0.0020689212,0.00040054464,0.000040221916,0.00022134422,0.010942735,0.00021944582,0.00015424548,0.8979763,0.041978404,0.045903023],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010753797,0.000060557817,0.011293235,0.0025070517,0.00013570835,0.00044999638,0.020504951,0.0013690578,0.0004642671,0.3758666,0.586819,0.00042210682],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9687312,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.97913057,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.18938658,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.18938658,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.25385928,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9401967},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00031747643,0.00033857193,0.00037428597,0.00031539114,0.00034995753,0.00004893189,0.00090904057,0.0005120873,0.9968342],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0012061957,0.000392175,0.00054187776,0.00042782808,0.000104637504,0.000038976203,0.001338664,0.0003343092,0.99561524],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99940944,0.00005469181,0.000047185524,0.00014919299,0.000250678,0.0000888815],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9978143,0.0005536815,0.00008347033,0.00036947106,0.00053495617,0.0006441677],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009289189,0.0015966736,0.0011552178,0.002514344,0.0016999859,0.0046608113,0.0018361283,0.0027116009,0.9844095],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0025502185,0.00080037833,0.000748805,0.0028633634,0.0018161384,0.0057807807,0.004012627,0.0016969056,0.9833519],"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":[0.00016271965,0.00015724817,0.00047637464,0.00042533356,0.000014308742,0.00018165729,0.0000905072,0.00016408238,0.0013103102,0.006880338,0.59376013,0.39637703],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026672917,0.00003585381,0.0008686877,0.0001957687,0.0000061115934,0.00021112888,0.00012937486,0.00012735961,0.00020932549,0.001454973,0.99671954,0.000015101289],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0044778334,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004582022,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.015590489,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0011909656,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014645527,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.022237957},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.88104653,0.006038245,0.006203513,0.018073967,0.00086451013,0.00087420124,0.0007160674,0.00006417284,0.086118795],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9766688,0.002942854,0.0024750186,0.006187603,0.0002937805,0.00032600638,0.00027961363,0.000016422837,0.010809875],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.94429606,0.020495212,0.0029458508,0.0031309815,0.023631703,0.0055002496],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9310456,0.027839987,0.009668396,0.006681004,0.021368813,0.0033962445],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.052697193,0.00034888185,0.0007239887,0.0053294874,0.015408108,0.004625556,0.0023848552,0.0021574341,0.005613139],"category_scores_gemma":[0.122354575,0.0006118463,0.00044495685,0.003959736,0.0063407025,0.0014449582,0.006189918,0.0020714772,0.0008823949],"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":[0.0009279487,0.00022604511,0.34783486,0.0013210922,0.0004962733,0.0027176074,0.1725701,0.00073192077,0.0064480226,0.03767072,0.05762904,0.37142637],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001479851,0.00041097373,0.6955896,0.0024357575,0.0005494226,0.002006219,0.10203085,0.0020339165,0.012323119,0.013190069,0.16890627,0.0003758851],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.32981092,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6666208,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6701891,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.010602774,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.021198228,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6557824},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98253053,0.0004317394,0.004798352,0.00052927266,0.00007863489,0.0002582217,0.000008452846,0.000023134848,0.011341722],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9947848,0.00014003714,0.004045491,0.0002658366,0.000040957962,0.00010122373,0.0000081690605,0.00000718373,0.0006063273],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9826214,0.013168326,0.00041887842,0.00054565,0.002891991,0.00035374262],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.92952615,0.057038434,0.007561203,0.002719166,0.001704991,0.0014500171],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012602008,0.00029285223,0.00028364878,0.0005195321,0.0013447163,0.0010762966,0.00032828932,0.00077751937,0.0024410575],"category_scores_gemma":[0.11265344,0.0001737526,0.0002329392,0.00016954375,0.0014303725,0.0009959703,0.0013251228,0.0010247417,0.00044602194],"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":[0.007621409,0.00815106,0.08372015,0.00076271343,0.00036163538,0.0010654493,0.022009112,0.002425422,0.11260141,0.014162001,0.002630058,0.74448955],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0015983423,0.048975274,0.65369874,0.0015185003,0.0006818975,0.004070956,0.018950922,0.020704402,0.15709428,0.060514856,0.031739745,0.0004521408],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00035044109,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009918356,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.012602008,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00033461754,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00072106445,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.066646576},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.996687,0.00017667546,0.00013877642,0.00040499968,0.00003508751,0.000050466537,0.000011780156,0.000004096283,0.0024911917],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987085,0.00014579148,0.00042451435,0.00026391345,0.00003674428,0.000043921777,0.000021090285,0.0000027115439,0.00035271363],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99081355,0.005876422,0.00060384604,0.00022433142,0.002165681,0.00031629406],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9531463,0.02878837,0.011650803,0.0011712583,0.002810981,0.0024323394],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009754722,0.00044203998,0.0004129109,0.0008071081,0.0019925495,0.0026660985,0.00044271068,0.0016687083,0.0024872525],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10387144,0.0003156195,0.00044769293,0.00020795329,0.0022797177,0.0008387779,0.00257295,0.001588008,0.00030071495],"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":[0.022682564,0.005625955,0.4419499,0.0023859465,0.0010945187,0.009264451,0.24243276,0.0025956742,0.10966245,0.005712319,0.009174454,0.147419],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008489917,0.018844716,0.7709875,0.00095960125,0.00071733486,0.0065713073,0.16271614,0.004258855,0.015893547,0.005314359,0.012352139,0.00053551444],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008482396,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0021167777,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009754722,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00090214534,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00085818843,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.051588476},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9282999,0.010895136,0.00086735614,0.028069211,0.00021412708,0.00022273361,0.0003276802,0.000019439874,0.031084409],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9845479,0.0073247133,0.00087361626,0.0023377086,0.00007786809,0.000037482467,0.00014891243,0.000019303376,0.004632563],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9929711,0.0024032902,0.00024501613,0.00050242746,0.0019375164,0.0019406017],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97803897,0.007447754,0.001851698,0.0006033345,0.008292199,0.0037659893],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00814922,0.0004294493,0.0008044932,0.002128507,0.015728293,0.0045707934,0.0023580852,0.002624299,0.0029247885],"category_scores_gemma":[0.037377838,0.00045478888,0.0004482199,0.004093095,0.006826764,0.0024079264,0.0039723716,0.003713544,0.00026780434],"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":[0.00074947905,0.00081883505,0.36196235,0.0005535696,0.00019282912,0.006594044,0.3671303,0.0015824258,0.00051360077,0.024222257,0.030716246,0.20496412],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012309427,0.0003181714,0.49723116,0.0013097558,0.00027233205,0.0012439671,0.42475975,0.0024206059,0.00071825145,0.008840489,0.06246419,0.00029819884],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9893811,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9962566,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07007513,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.07007513,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.110705286,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.50843304},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.022848729,0.052096333,0.040771108,0.8150444,0.0020039917,0.0002781223,0.00019833843,0.000090727524,0.06666829],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8265976,0.03189692,0.043947395,0.087209105,0.0056527266,0.00070735434,0.00012106358,0.00013480205,0.0037331537],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9459164,0.04507789,0.0013652614,0.0024190305,0.0041247346,0.0010966999],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.79230416,0.1882891,0.0052797706,0.0032959203,0.00817709,0.0026540011],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.07685606,0.0012703594,0.0018544694,0.006832388,0.009107029,0.031195497,0.006856906,0.014287425,0.004185987],"category_scores_gemma":[0.13624868,0.0012445688,0.00165697,0.0062242234,0.14021318,0.035532556,0.0071806307,0.021071484,0.0006010148],"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":[0.000041790194,0.000061426734,0.0018105152,0.00019256261,0.00004015951,0.00026117006,0.055665217,0.0006858793,0.00009004079,0.9122686,0.012059619,0.016822938],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026209604,0.000044484994,0.0015165464,0.00081980554,0.000014366595,0.00017363229,0.041049507,0.0014279409,0.00010584534,0.9350143,0.019716397,0.00009100358],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0323998,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.023386035,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07685606,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.018844252,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008637083,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.40645856},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.003294099,0.14091088,0.5932543,0.05483148,0.06620239,0.0005584051,0.0018687451,0.0017801938,0.13729945],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.065770194,0.09278297,0.45115164,0.013339844,0.05890616,0.0016349097,0.005714523,0.0016937507,0.30900592],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9863275,0.0063767466,0.0010336622,0.0019332009,0.0038292988,0.0004995733],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9747523,0.012452613,0.0008596929,0.004400721,0.0063577495,0.0011769434],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.018679323,0.001890718,0.0024038842,0.0052766367,0.0019073199,0.010679662,0.002676839,0.0044064214,0.03554216],"category_scores_gemma":[0.040059056,0.0013188061,0.002488825,0.0028884232,0.0055453368,0.0048396373,0.004294816,0.009298804,0.014414776],"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":[0.00021637944,0.00010240745,0.0011716594,0.0005308491,0.00023214183,0.0003828463,0.00038361762,0.0032302164,0.0009775345,0.15172307,0.39348784,0.44756138],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002587377,0.00007720975,0.0008316567,0.0006009558,0.0000426213,0.0006202493,0.00010718992,0.0054274704,0.0007039309,0.11680682,0.87469935,0.000056609733],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0032080426,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0022646172,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03554216,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0032532627,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0061083273,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.11890036},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9969547,0.00019658147,0.00023769488,0.00010967682,0.000010586925,0.0000151933555,0.000008632206,0.0000030427655,0.002463947],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9993018,0.00010135844,0.0003660739,0.00005066755,0.000008665972,0.000011525229,0.000010460906,0.0000021805383,0.00014729054],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.98986405,0.0063965325,0.0005694999,0.00055812567,0.0022814088,0.00033035604],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8413573,0.11252654,0.03442314,0.0031470265,0.004210657,0.0043353364],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010752663,0.00025525282,0.000313386,0.0005337193,0.00079111755,0.0016323009,0.000345984,0.0007795915,0.0027476011],"category_scores_gemma":[0.11589802,0.00027202853,0.0003083657,0.00019748286,0.0021239603,0.0010331918,0.0013810949,0.0017239641,0.00014242397],"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":[0.006686615,0.002885568,0.6735108,0.0016147478,0.0006060689,0.0042141033,0.15350758,0.0012772817,0.05065931,0.010959961,0.0019204299,0.09215751],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00029835876,0.0038375973,0.93796676,0.00069377804,0.00025805927,0.0030205646,0.031314537,0.0012879373,0.0127313575,0.0025484106,0.005877468,0.00016510408],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0013381641,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001604258,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010752663,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00072680815,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006710348,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05686617},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.023290236,0.022863979,0.0481683,0.50630593,0.0041238912,0.00016097089,0.00035301797,0.00018410436,0.3945497],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.74372935,0.013210219,0.033793334,0.14118735,0.0064430297,0.00032852162,0.0004013513,0.00034476613,0.060562],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97945446,0.008600538,0.0013154594,0.0037834106,0.005385301,0.0014608817],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94122094,0.03238464,0.0058072824,0.009598167,0.006434037,0.004554998],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.029127898,0.00081204274,0.0015919525,0.0040772646,0.0038553015,0.0143853165,0.0020524275,0.010007309,0.036041126],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06906935,0.00058863766,0.0008923486,0.002052957,0.033106364,0.041766666,0.012418451,0.011739261,0.0050478084],"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":[0.000073703035,0.00008198529,0.0010877862,0.00042714557,0.00005866929,0.00021670108,0.0031392032,0.00024892428,0.0002837431,0.945068,0.016057098,0.03325707],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000062605715,0.00007977164,0.0010222959,0.0006649473,0.000033975804,0.00032686527,0.001913856,0.00021582676,0.00035212914,0.7983818,0.19690384,0.00004213777],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0028418677,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003179653,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.036041126,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006027837,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008835359,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.15404487},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9941719,0.00019283645,0.0025032023,0.00054997834,0.000043047246,0.00015874235,0.0000070388196,0.000017118618,0.0023560259],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9865868,0.00039324007,0.011141048,0.00047011944,0.0000465347,0.00019079207,0.00002385505,0.0000053181025,0.0011423015],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99508226,0.0035124414,0.000321089,0.0002334932,0.00059875415,0.0002519031],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9793043,0.01412835,0.003595451,0.001104623,0.0010566716,0.0008106945],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009769266,0.00037481973,0.00027540853,0.00033320094,0.000983268,0.0009340215,0.00054583565,0.0013938089,0.002244042],"category_scores_gemma":[0.064968616,0.00025297687,0.00019946611,0.00009311085,0.0005567823,0.0008367355,0.0010906361,0.0011044798,0.0004000154],"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":[0.0035026984,0.010272862,0.15486173,0.0015684215,0.00030748305,0.002620499,0.10434161,0.0018184795,0.0789734,0.0040603653,0.005226524,0.632446],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0026214276,0.0452702,0.5832753,0.0039853733,0.001719376,0.009005991,0.12640381,0.016131883,0.102835126,0.010518666,0.09752491,0.00070786383],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004229713,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00090622157,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009769266,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00024108954,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012947416,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.051665425},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9990941,0.00018685532,0.00016269859,0.0001050969,0.000008702505,0.000018646058,0.000011606365,0.0000023737427,0.00040977774],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99944955,0.000120791025,0.00025201123,0.00003128571,0.0000108246695,0.000013622623,0.000020465743,0.0000012311364,0.00010014473],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9945485,0.0032551182,0.0006710961,0.0002782624,0.0008328295,0.00041419364],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9735054,0.013077265,0.010164149,0.0006140725,0.0015350196,0.0011040589],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0054045827,0.00021068146,0.0002894055,0.00068636535,0.0012074646,0.0016035058,0.00030036797,0.00067962357,0.0019365767],"category_scores_gemma":[0.060546752,0.00023865317,0.00024114885,0.00039568625,0.0008224859,0.00059395493,0.00091232033,0.00062112336,0.00026066316],"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":[0.0047818786,0.0006227043,0.84858334,0.00033102118,0.0002325057,0.0022992396,0.030764386,0.0015703815,0.014252395,0.0008256409,0.0016945206,0.094042026],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010003067,0.0015586464,0.9553538,0.00014705057,0.00009144792,0.0014850534,0.03388441,0.0015080326,0.0026256607,0.00084974925,0.0022948766,0.00010139694],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002454904,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0055859056,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0054045827,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00071680255,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008436856,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.028582454},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99788946,0.00006413162,0.00021409178,0.00019032623,0.000010032227,0.000044426662,0.000021573009,0.0000038508156,0.0015621334],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99928313,0.000038064933,0.00023538746,0.000035971854,0.000011385878,0.000044199194,0.000033901335,0.0000030466279,0.00031483787],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9898683,0.00565546,0.0011377779,0.00061744096,0.0017422201,0.0009788369],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7216926,0.21661936,0.043620534,0.0044911015,0.009096858,0.004479461],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.019414436,0.00031886052,0.0005845761,0.0019864494,0.0031620956,0.0038648336,0.0010697896,0.0019932997,0.0027912534],"category_scores_gemma":[0.23160009,0.0005569503,0.00032068172,0.0011760953,0.0009805228,0.0016727303,0.0026415738,0.00206904,0.00039181215],"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":[0.0066159316,0.0024327096,0.7244765,0.00035789373,0.00052401173,0.0011890649,0.14955927,0.0029131833,0.008755454,0.004041969,0.0020523013,0.0970817],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000747829,0.0007858537,0.95539045,0.00009469939,0.000108926004,0.00015648859,0.03717516,0.0018735003,0.0013598434,0.0016770811,0.0012115951,0.00009161413],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0047083613,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0077174637,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.019414436,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014008691,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0021422633,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1026746},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99819905,0.0001195856,0.00021103553,0.00005643154,0.000016983666,0.000031493553,0.000024359551,0.000004011689,0.0013370651],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9977247,0.00014306582,0.0008027741,0.00003333733,0.00002256134,0.000051451894,0.00004437728,0.000004487998,0.0011732207],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99570125,0.002652682,0.00045570324,0.00026759307,0.0006387348,0.00028401482],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9535062,0.03302941,0.008002058,0.001185169,0.0016758707,0.002601329],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007770232,0.00033513186,0.0004874922,0.00078091834,0.00049262826,0.00093373447,0.0002368811,0.0004681473,0.0055458816],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0412057,0.00029847363,0.00037873752,0.00024574454,0.00049382384,0.0005120758,0.00066721404,0.00051322556,0.0004081614],"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":[0.02554168,0.0027848952,0.80128807,0.0003517036,0.00054913486,0.0020436905,0.011583304,0.0012736605,0.063390866,0.0016207461,0.0013256781,0.08824669],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002497398,0.006224215,0.97997457,0.000075926284,0.00020642308,0.0007598463,0.0027299284,0.0014925229,0.0060799993,0.000871611,0.0012757377,0.000059534494],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005348672,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0022612573,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.007770232,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003630226,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00053925085,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04109335},"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":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.004362851,0.019878492,0.00032982833,0.40137017,0.022120507,0.00016431845,0.0036467412,0.0001305343,0.5479966],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.03267265,0.008025925,0.000645735,0.14704372,0.004423846,0.00006551471,0.0007173226,0.00011309028,0.80629224],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99715257,0.00014842686,0.000113158014,0.00031763385,0.0015521667,0.00071602623],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9957788,0.00042564925,0.00009285183,0.0001412881,0.0027750009,0.00078640465],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0023128793,0.0004329019,0.00052894227,0.001588958,0.014616343,0.007848025,0.0015202384,0.009726202,0.07506836],"category_scores_gemma":[0.010010404,0.0003924907,0.0006572339,0.002240804,0.002404352,0.002080137,0.0018214266,0.006399187,0.0066444483],"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":[0.000018350767,0.000007845199,0.0005633521,0.00006906229,0.0000075605803,0.00032837654,0.0002925959,0.000022775042,0.00011009149,0.036187038,0.95033693,0.01205595],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008596649,0.0000033519198,0.0022476832,0.00009961001,0.000009426816,0.00008413071,0.0004293122,0.000021492473,0.0000795747,0.0017442873,0.9952571,0.000015458452],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.92896914,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.97866607,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07506836,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03805811,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.08623089,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.27613223},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9328325,0.0004525625,0.04437509,0.0064981706,0.000050912266,0.000015354326,0.000031794214,0.000039769762,0.015703889],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9982502,0.00005857545,0.0014137842,0.0001182591,0.000010393208,0.0000028906234,0.000008084502,0.0000042883266,0.00013361935],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9984471,0.00096272083,0.00007095589,0.00013954645,0.00024359486,0.0001360279],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9875514,0.010112061,0.0012967017,0.0003965223,0.00042974122,0.00021362028],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0032511652,0.0001438327,0.00021055015,0.0004643137,0.0009533364,0.0022500877,0.00037236337,0.0010867717,0.0016943992],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03500441,0.00018162285,0.00028426768,0.0003781367,0.0025382182,0.003551662,0.00132407,0.0014166354,0.00014176332],"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":[0.0009945363,0.00022658185,0.117435545,0.00032635176,0.00040585204,0.0011614801,0.033947445,0.060815215,0.0061259717,0.6299016,0.0051368573,0.14352255],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007610868,0.00012658718,0.045662668,0.00012549589,0.0001189677,0.00030510832,0.010551333,0.123008035,0.0014930312,0.8154346,0.003003348,0.000094671464],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0023120884,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0021640933,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0032511652,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00069781457,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00060559815,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.017194033},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8553192,0.0024793334,0.0005098668,0.016173022,0.00028804538,0.00012737302,0.0003470111,0.00001872847,0.124737486],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9895219,0.00083950034,0.00028676403,0.0015786017,0.000048176433,0.000058990197,0.00007431346,0.000011402153,0.007580345],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9831539,0.0058589648,0.00067932316,0.0011895951,0.0070116133,0.0021065485],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9453951,0.022411777,0.0063992967,0.0026331602,0.016233163,0.0069274902],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.015128433,0.00022810222,0.0006148741,0.00345697,0.0112091275,0.0029171503,0.001564391,0.0011178709,0.009356956],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0817791,0.00038821244,0.0005301658,0.0043236925,0.009185831,0.0017113433,0.006236969,0.0025483367,0.0004032082],"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":[0.0023783795,0.00035649777,0.5397898,0.0009532872,0.00035158417,0.00078781205,0.2030943,0.0003428546,0.0014325842,0.078000784,0.024852306,0.14765981],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000047026973,0.00016645693,0.9031347,0.00029885597,0.00017516152,0.00011710725,0.062230438,0.00020360391,0.0004945964,0.0024822266,0.030553006,0.00009687519],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8780914,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9376774,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.121908605,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.033220377,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.06258461,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24525303},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00334176,0.07276595,0.0016428769,0.69468564,0.014926058,0.000080163656,0.00017439893,0.00017736775,0.21220578],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1345817,0.020285359,0.0024678467,0.69259167,0.010347523,0.0002936058,0.00011136602,0.00026836718,0.13905254],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99040204,0.0023698087,0.00056359405,0.0014986295,0.0036205202,0.0015453903],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9848077,0.009123743,0.00084352744,0.0011100841,0.002620948,0.0014940207],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009710228,0.00063874683,0.00068130903,0.0019583046,0.014604536,0.01156181,0.0032146836,0.018198745,0.01322648],"category_scores_gemma":[0.043094553,0.0012258436,0.0004223478,0.0019660925,0.018356407,0.010116822,0.005368666,0.022536475,0.0024371382],"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":[0.000014749637,0.000005061984,0.00017204887,0.000091553455,0.0000039484403,0.00022712791,0.0027366632,0.00003639516,0.00007258745,0.17086034,0.79779917,0.027980328],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000015601474,0.000018971848,0.0012084893,0.0009869621,0.000010820293,0.0002551874,0.0018696467,0.00011996125,0.00023597151,0.050820827,0.94440264,0.00005493861],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.25837395,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.38068664,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.25837395,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.010687151,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.026101071,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.51374006},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9987004,0.00003581119,0.00002849712,0.000037090842,0.0000036166641,0.000004475505,0.000004460268,4.5541609e-7,0.0011851944],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9995684,0.000048159636,0.000063328924,0.000030248852,0.000005076637,0.000004385267,0.000012257055,8.1139484e-7,0.00026727113],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9984675,0.000929961,0.00009946941,0.00008773852,0.0002774015,0.00013778835],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99093366,0.0040862537,0.0028201176,0.00030012339,0.0007806994,0.0010791328],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002302612,0.0001548698,0.00020914795,0.00039675878,0.0009732553,0.0010242371,0.00012350558,0.0002918914,0.0026414266],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015277002,0.000095719384,0.00020054702,0.00015883707,0.0005402865,0.00028497947,0.00058923406,0.00043269584,0.0003394045],"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":[0.00088131346,0.0003734283,0.97261953,0.000025806674,0.00008245897,0.0003718419,0.0041551036,0.00011125843,0.003283818,0.00023769743,0.00022537129,0.017632365],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000014208427,0.0002670362,0.99277097,0.000026928372,0.00004003341,0.00022836895,0.0050739245,0.0002830186,0.00058998907,0.00016428732,0.0005295522,0.000011577144],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0025646177,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00964961,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0026414266,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00028401843,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00053827156,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.012177527},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0002065032,0.07945675,0.0010782442,0.86919844,0.03305461,0.000012476465,0.00010549324,0.00003936581,0.016848097],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.024327287,0.117251225,0.0029747414,0.53120047,0.14571068,0.00014672425,0.00015815398,0.0002457595,0.17798501],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99847263,0.00065232854,0.000066982626,0.00025008002,0.0004854247,0.000072528],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98639524,0.011300753,0.00022335855,0.00017809225,0.0013869568,0.0005155453],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002777509,0.0009728938,0.00095447607,0.0015068644,0.0037439545,0.007314014,0.0016426273,0.007912953,0.009510602],"category_scores_gemma":[0.014411769,0.00059745694,0.00049393444,0.0021294442,0.0077141635,0.0102925645,0.0017487761,0.014584661,0.003420205],"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":[0.000011736382,0.0000065813033,0.00006263317,0.000046702957,0.0000048606876,0.000019136482,0.00017119813,0.00009276131,0.000019978448,0.034323942,0.95905524,0.006185196],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000022758433,0.000010626212,0.0003376538,0.0002267268,0.000010901511,0.00007838003,0.00055734033,0.00028594938,0.0000646249,0.11780776,0.8805683,0.000029019147],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.023649294,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.039085757,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.023649294,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003919605,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004946108,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.047023296},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.15540636,0.0034918345,0.3019256,0.120445244,0.0010350873,0.00047436866,0.0001530013,0.0005493759,0.41651914],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97070104,0.00052705844,0.018712597,0.0023916182,0.00016530234,0.00011930309,0.000039327202,0.00014428105,0.0071995715],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9520185,0.036620338,0.0007520796,0.0033555257,0.0045202393,0.0027333056],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9329531,0.05124405,0.0036373131,0.006924511,0.0032540828,0.0019868545],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.04956006,0.0007064632,0.0008295066,0.0027372374,0.013124013,0.025186408,0.004318217,0.009483048,0.010536829],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08383375,0.00083507044,0.0012002399,0.0014535196,0.07120665,0.030986648,0.01600738,0.01022116,0.0013147902],"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":[0.00004563513,0.000030929317,0.00054011185,0.00006451027,0.0000256907,0.0005891078,0.100705095,0.00071132317,0.00021789914,0.884759,0.0021741458,0.010136708],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000039401137,0.000038122445,0.00042416304,0.00020122492,0.000026485488,0.00022306133,0.042539254,0.0017310192,0.0006829231,0.9163557,0.037692532,0.000046052563],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005882563,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004358035,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04956006,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0074748406,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.010183121,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.26210177},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.25436884,0.030402107,0.13079828,0.08360837,0.0018892644,0.0011442713,0.00017376558,0.00023094214,0.49738413],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97128785,0.003887358,0.010911716,0.0045331027,0.00043620894,0.00034823257,0.000026342364,0.000042886517,0.008526372],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.88150907,0.09309269,0.004576847,0.00510479,0.0109826205,0.004733918],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8394153,0.12286431,0.014937081,0.0061908555,0.010656808,0.0059355833],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08436347,0.0004719131,0.000920986,0.0033375414,0.008008409,0.013029238,0.0034113082,0.0092439065,0.0031081294],"category_scores_gemma":[0.21316303,0.0010294517,0.00067443534,0.0022209573,0.029797373,0.0074553913,0.010019396,0.009207307,0.0008160562],"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":[0.00010860319,0.000066132765,0.0039240015,0.00019169814,0.000037422604,0.00044532891,0.009447017,0.0021561887,0.00041406363,0.92662674,0.004208422,0.05237442],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001855571,0.0006904106,0.01828283,0.0025787544,0.00013993701,0.00069568824,0.009040684,0.005615901,0.0014252465,0.83904153,0.121953934,0.00034943593],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.013869622,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02166636,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08436347,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009509286,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.016618002,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.446162},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.030773832,0.0068486044,0.0036653343,0.8757353,0.0049295817,0.00002229257,0.00005508116,0.0000919655,0.07787804],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6661419,0.004048157,0.003465618,0.28570017,0.0038749357,0.00002385162,0.00003580566,0.00006998437,0.036639556],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9936451,0.0017230031,0.00028239976,0.0008184877,0.0024953645,0.0010356713],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98777884,0.0072893016,0.00076362386,0.00047028522,0.0028979054,0.00080001797],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0078112055,0.0003124615,0.0005394948,0.0012167142,0.010991079,0.008387557,0.0017411653,0.013727433,0.0015096342],"category_scores_gemma":[0.053641517,0.000311325,0.00039369322,0.0012282699,0.020895198,0.0043422873,0.002733061,0.015426086,0.00040584584],"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":[0.000072633906,0.000011629861,0.0029906193,0.00009403524,0.000035502253,0.0027765306,0.024320079,0.00024475608,0.00037892716,0.56168586,0.37837672,0.02901257],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000027114316,0.000038415536,0.004727885,0.0006413204,0.00007343892,0.0021978354,0.023977956,0.0010322072,0.0011477574,0.17868365,0.7872584,0.0001941499],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2969947,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4747979,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.2969947,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009107554,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.012172172,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.59053195},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.30689675,0.004614493,0.018076472,0.24757719,0.0028580755,0.00059915864,0.000546219,0.00019122429,0.41864038],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96541315,0.00092728133,0.0035712824,0.009701972,0.0003229138,0.00009507883,0.00009768861,0.000080056765,0.019790526],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9204756,0.029618485,0.0024296958,0.005196061,0.025332676,0.016947445],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.81793493,0.11617816,0.008200237,0.0061257156,0.036578886,0.014982131],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.06917459,0.0006824743,0.001609286,0.004977818,0.037142914,0.02235529,0.003564307,0.008836899,0.011876315],"category_scores_gemma":[0.31491846,0.0011321537,0.0010907297,0.004276194,0.020645674,0.0071254456,0.008925638,0.011025404,0.00095690315],"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":[0.0008194249,0.00032631593,0.068039306,0.0003155637,0.00030707533,0.0011409847,0.1152055,0.0040907725,0.0007571904,0.4974899,0.15471719,0.15679085],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00019911584,0.00018423653,0.13004297,0.000962077,0.0003078341,0.00054315996,0.09277915,0.00936186,0.0015036791,0.50481546,0.25837782,0.0009226906],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9406621,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9555054,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09047605,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.09047605,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.25149944,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6564528},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3931712,0.0047996016,0.012446566,0.13126312,0.006643209,0.00041640308,0.0005225672,0.00043524208,0.45030206],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.917023,0.0020560406,0.004569088,0.011983798,0.0010397029,0.00019895517,0.00026143063,0.00038408543,0.06248386],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.96322244,0.018516015,0.002381202,0.002975101,0.00961137,0.0032938586],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8820616,0.03338851,0.013127395,0.0056500216,0.046638053,0.019134331],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.027729109,0.00029351132,0.00060395105,0.0022653867,0.008152747,0.011547689,0.0012512149,0.002680008,0.014499614],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1677598,0.0008212693,0.00048205527,0.001820027,0.0050751613,0.008376424,0.002532307,0.0047949986,0.009295146],"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":[0.00027571115,0.00024803428,0.07113443,0.00057476043,0.00019330197,0.0022494618,0.38660643,0.0004150017,0.0059426785,0.061562587,0.22700925,0.24378838],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000118092146,0.00023711377,0.085241966,0.001841917,0.00016272688,0.0018272197,0.23882917,0.0017413576,0.0038688905,0.044353213,0.6214468,0.00033154982],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012066694,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02742354,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.027729109,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0039381017,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009405532,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14664727},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9383682,0.00045397872,0.0010562361,0.0030085938,0.000058984577,0.000045777044,0.000011331661,0.000010882835,0.05698609],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99829787,0.00006744019,0.00023173293,0.00034452273,0.000011032031,0.000009127882,0.0000032947828,0.000004988609,0.0010300372],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9645609,0.01950019,0.0012171551,0.0022500844,0.009411261,0.0030604603],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9070795,0.06177788,0.008158551,0.00459327,0.014878108,0.0035125813],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.020751867,0.00024919712,0.0006969081,0.0028575964,0.016430566,0.013164657,0.002230143,0.002604503,0.0015398705],"category_scores_gemma":[0.09813202,0.00053232844,0.00024749184,0.0022415847,0.031013746,0.0033734785,0.012051145,0.005143216,0.0001597414],"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":[0.0003537548,0.00012790467,0.052081957,0.00017705552,0.000100420046,0.0029375616,0.7524,0.0008455672,0.0041696434,0.13707821,0.0020112263,0.04771671],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008900278,0.00069438,0.2415667,0.00064082316,0.00030540169,0.0014685721,0.63912195,0.0024235703,0.0071947025,0.060494803,0.045667946,0.00033209892],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.16624023,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.21978417,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.16624023,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0179703,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.011940507,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3305452},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.1056861,0.008466221,0.047667038,0.71928924,0.0050278543,0.00075617555,0.00014700305,0.00020113871,0.112759195],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.90860355,0.004697579,0.019351419,0.043709096,0.0021739993,0.0003296463,0.00008235505,0.00012298352,0.02092924],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9705201,0.016842252,0.0017577172,0.0022152336,0.004891608,0.0037730199],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96406555,0.022284497,0.0041824826,0.0015383427,0.0040549226,0.0038742113],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.039791524,0.0005998822,0.0011076054,0.0017529315,0.0095216,0.008664584,0.0025801775,0.015616541,0.014863237],"category_scores_gemma":[0.18046641,0.00074054516,0.00092606933,0.0009684744,0.012272367,0.01600953,0.007482249,0.013027858,0.0047212294],"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":[0.00047396147,0.00028144868,0.012420343,0.0007734874,0.000090335525,0.00567951,0.07282489,0.0010600946,0.0024080814,0.54429376,0.13816689,0.22152719],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014771648,0.00048604253,0.011869364,0.0031517067,0.000093639625,0.00618026,0.13009901,0.0036174287,0.0018949858,0.54764676,0.2943147,0.00049845467],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004133075,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009945955,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.039791524,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0037928156,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.017175494,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21044022},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.03352793,0.06382756,0.055216998,0.5160062,0.004445405,0.00015362093,0.00031792896,0.00008269403,0.3264218],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9189995,0.01748385,0.019898472,0.028209025,0.0043492257,0.00022982205,0.00009499491,0.000077965975,0.010657128],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.97965264,0.012361579,0.0008542126,0.002311505,0.0039393622,0.00088075106],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96167177,0.029903432,0.0015857425,0.0028217228,0.0034988872,0.0005184179],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.031204402,0.00044161777,0.0006837555,0.0017574197,0.0038170354,0.0061205355,0.002368462,0.0058742226,0.0026645344],"category_scores_gemma":[0.040144242,0.0004528923,0.0005200273,0.0010266394,0.058746625,0.0136381565,0.0046358067,0.015370954,0.00066360657],"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":[0.000027359489,0.000006721364,0.00016663554,0.00003770615,0.000006273921,0.000041445965,0.0008730308,0.00023777809,0.000029950248,0.9888888,0.0032900753,0.006394147],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000022747645,0.00002224546,0.00053575455,0.00021984166,0.000007284318,0.0001015326,0.0006018256,0.0006770115,0.00018644985,0.9324677,0.06513332,0.000024327002],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0045293537,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0022295073,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.031204402,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005955242,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006936529,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1650266},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.72840345,0.06572479,0.0009368904,0.012268261,0.00016018708,0.00003203155,0.0003124855,0.000006669429,0.19215526],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9808008,0.015859049,0.00011975399,0.00023198298,0.00015421024,0.000011817311,0.000086407716,0.000007234533,0.002728673],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9980837,0.0011033805,0.00004963295,0.00018969545,0.00021866256,0.00035497313],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9947884,0.0032204362,0.00077214185,0.00018984696,0.00063266064,0.00039649964],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0040756715,0.00014582169,0.00021697806,0.004681947,0.0041618193,0.0035244382,0.0006129932,0.0012317025,0.009874222],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008145486,0.00021171714,0.00012508273,0.007447883,0.008492496,0.005123965,0.001973933,0.001887121,0.00036440504],"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":[0.00021893001,0.0001929515,0.03813171,0.00040047622,0.000049560847,0.00070565665,0.17323284,0.00043841574,0.0002146079,0.691428,0.00644588,0.08854097],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000029378565,0.00034089354,0.31177303,0.0018695038,0.00006186953,0.0013708447,0.12861948,0.0006983341,0.00051164255,0.052595522,0.5020694,0.00006015559],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010824624,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.020591686,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010824624,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0051455414,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014474288,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.037333667},"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":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000095208095,0.7849671,0.0001968912,0.12783083,0.0816473,0.000030183044,0.00015040315,0.000028852162,0.005053087],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0020216666,0.76109344,0.00039485074,0.10239179,0.09633643,0.00009210055,0.00021212488,0.00007125821,0.037386376],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99798477,0.0006354193,0.00020470539,0.00026125074,0.0008000198,0.00011371155],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98366493,0.010835157,0.0008368625,0.00017925666,0.0037732744,0.0007104609],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0025284102,0.0017813457,0.0022899027,0.0042718737,0.0013983153,0.0051203,0.002378162,0.007452879,0.011717512],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02029326,0.0011288562,0.0008935874,0.005368936,0.002850697,0.0043907454,0.0011864732,0.0082863495,0.009417131],"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":[0.000007663861,0.0000032266903,0.000025750369,0.00032286978,0.000006537991,0.000013030935,0.0000126937975,0.000021647329,0.000009811504,0.00032609107,0.9907967,0.0084540425],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000036070083,0.000027627737,0.00074447744,0.0035849405,0.00004426747,0.00031385443,0.00011682896,0.000080806676,0.000060730592,0.0023890168,0.9925724,0.000029006242],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.019500887,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06398996,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.019500887,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0042126644,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007413775,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.039198935},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.2511478,0.049178794,0.011649238,0.35051724,0.009031951,0.0009628023,0.0008359748,0.0002835954,0.3263926],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.89328927,0.023286022,0.009601217,0.020895682,0.0015210322,0.0004340197,0.00039687558,0.00022265843,0.050353184],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.95353764,0.02280894,0.0018900012,0.0012131473,0.018494077,0.002056176],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8824439,0.03648374,0.006780833,0.0022167873,0.06279544,0.009279307],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0463162,0.00042219565,0.0006729342,0.002358489,0.005325159,0.0110180015,0.002093681,0.0029129635,0.013936904],"category_scores_gemma":[0.12733582,0.0002968416,0.00075760187,0.0020386125,0.006460385,0.0058866274,0.0039091585,0.0054396642,0.0020849006],"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":[0.00063878944,0.00031412015,0.03389473,0.0043568052,0.00017518661,0.0009940291,0.13868558,0.0005521607,0.0014452594,0.060034048,0.15743297,0.6014764],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000105008054,0.0005175021,0.06745256,0.009109935,0.00027408666,0.0006986341,0.13282593,0.001567158,0.0021259163,0.008689001,0.7764046,0.00022970104],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.18487746,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.29801062,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.18487746,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.027528174,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.046371076,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3676027},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.46210477,0.010087574,0.012119597,0.11382049,0.0021842564,0.0021726887,0.00009440546,0.00036664822,0.39704955],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.87433213,0.010407282,0.018754134,0.015091717,0.0005680395,0.00097331987,0.00013323556,0.000060571696,0.07967957],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9908694,0.0040812436,0.00044290457,0.00057728885,0.0015761029,0.0024530787],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97029907,0.007796028,0.0026213878,0.001509016,0.0051178383,0.012656616],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016374093,0.00032436318,0.00031615436,0.002207501,0.020711446,0.005663194,0.0030202044,0.0034650518,0.014663448],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03165915,0.0005232101,0.0005464174,0.001434596,0.0065868665,0.004098078,0.017913854,0.005556189,0.0012185281],"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":[0.000121163204,0.0020823248,0.036050145,0.0027633402,0.00017675184,0.0071195574,0.45326626,0.001331655,0.007697057,0.13196465,0.04561263,0.31181446],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010068758,0.0007781231,0.10681836,0.0024759225,0.00019857225,0.0031803104,0.39652267,0.00086110417,0.0021163193,0.02423897,0.46247727,0.00023168627],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08196814,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.30010393,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08196814,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007993653,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.05971754,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16298205},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.18448555,0.0072020786,0.12190001,0.052740376,0.00027481627,0.00031079733,0.00047982545,0.00023658875,0.63236994],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9671755,0.00095661543,0.010538564,0.00091245206,0.00010151426,0.00008040846,0.000053995733,0.000036505007,0.020144578],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98803115,0.0066515706,0.0005698863,0.0011731066,0.0021505766,0.0014237384],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97622234,0.016852366,0.001734276,0.0017701645,0.0030094835,0.0004113366],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01287916,0.0004734489,0.00054442213,0.0028546017,0.0057831826,0.015516128,0.0017734702,0.0039324923,0.009685051],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0217647,0.00069593947,0.0013154185,0.0019234007,0.031161984,0.009990217,0.0038254338,0.0049658064,0.0008105171],"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":[0.000013782281,0.000004203811,0.0003462224,0.000030266976,0.0000064575793,0.00014597742,0.0042500338,0.00033697858,0.000101267404,0.9923717,0.00046308694,0.0019300719],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003126161,0.000028578072,0.0029220593,0.00022833815,0.000047141588,0.00034691757,0.009396537,0.0037494802,0.0014454906,0.9355479,0.04618752,0.00006883825],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08127973,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06674111,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08127973,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01925939,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.016326629,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16161323},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.08635101,0.0047126645,0.026389182,0.033528063,0.0011414818,0.0013739123,0.0031229241,0.0006099214,0.8427708],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.71961695,0.002686036,0.051519096,0.0064615696,0.0002450446,0.0006040478,0.001695218,0.00019206697,0.21698001],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.94942,0.0044742837,0.004103516,0.0031177087,0.032033328,0.0068510585],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.90306383,0.015889928,0.0032336728,0.0038657032,0.069341086,0.004605761],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02026887,0.00040393605,0.0007379748,0.0057858857,0.019728439,0.014327667,0.0042033177,0.0055165207,0.008580138],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08809078,0.0013477473,0.0010623281,0.0059401426,0.0069081914,0.0026326217,0.0037134434,0.0062628533,0.0011846562],"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":[0.000062079875,0.00006091596,0.0071686176,0.00014836901,0.00003408191,0.0003689446,0.005874909,0.003278735,0.0005718731,0.86072254,0.07807687,0.04363196],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014095138,0.00011972499,0.065644674,0.0016413302,0.00016948055,0.00028951452,0.008539469,0.01595379,0.0024256962,0.16103625,0.74326974,0.00076932873],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9864934,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9879688,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.121188335,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.121188335,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.28396744,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.879287},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.42401198,0.020440634,0.20756745,0.21901742,0.004972125,0.00092457706,0.000575585,0.00196302,0.12052719],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8748746,0.006282145,0.08377092,0.01807634,0.0009811916,0.0006030528,0.00026961937,0.00037910507,0.01476298],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9782094,0.017087683,0.0007705122,0.0008454678,0.0024802908,0.00060659286],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9170668,0.06492509,0.0061597903,0.0053228782,0.004691268,0.0018341664],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.032764614,0.00052192574,0.00070552423,0.0010348014,0.0018783252,0.0053349375,0.0013280426,0.0031535535,0.013471926],"category_scores_gemma":[0.15424038,0.0004484184,0.0010619381,0.00051064644,0.005001143,0.01341629,0.003251573,0.004347056,0.0036782837],"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":[0.0016959957,0.0008140414,0.01307718,0.0013332885,0.00017093978,0.0004961105,0.029736336,0.0019503783,0.0058323797,0.11345078,0.0333941,0.79804844],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00060008286,0.0048108217,0.03062868,0.006749971,0.00042939602,0.0018093572,0.03452863,0.015207583,0.014924675,0.5371996,0.3524852,0.0006260469],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000992164,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0018933817,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.032764614,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012704465,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0034111314,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17327791},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.22265229,0.020695651,0.039743777,0.1272467,0.0021888965,0.0012680654,0.00051748566,0.00029937687,0.5853877],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.90137446,0.0078799715,0.026541071,0.013403862,0.00040110716,0.00023483958,0.00022742947,0.000104524355,0.049832754],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9682111,0.0048862854,0.0010271963,0.0021367844,0.01917104,0.0045675854],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97973984,0.0074079926,0.0014048739,0.001289168,0.008283643,0.0018744081],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.015372593,0.0005566847,0.0006056484,0.0056865057,0.02629911,0.014440602,0.0033634063,0.005299969,0.0050631175],"category_scores_gemma":[0.042860556,0.00075005944,0.0010007437,0.0058160513,0.016972551,0.0042989063,0.0058231805,0.00596735,0.00046996417],"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":[0.000050029827,0.00004394684,0.012125916,0.00025019015,0.000026616239,0.0009281183,0.022872286,0.0015780614,0.0006985976,0.8299246,0.027803835,0.10369781],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000057075606,0.00014843135,0.08872015,0.0011916653,0.00014164674,0.0012095779,0.037216242,0.005748142,0.0019079356,0.18880439,0.67413974,0.00071490504],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9407586,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9755475,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.10657253,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.10657253,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.21812458,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.77324146},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.71080977,0.11337866,0.018241467,0.053827662,0.0020852345,0.00012098546,0.00040787816,0.00011916292,0.101009205],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9692262,0.012361822,0.0027602136,0.008879296,0.0005858714,0.00004499855,0.00015955257,0.0000661227,0.0059159407],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9673588,0.014774617,0.0036128804,0.0040115356,0.0072047426,0.0030373207],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95531905,0.023269797,0.0076321503,0.0032997439,0.008077911,0.0024012467],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.045364123,0.00023566348,0.0008307731,0.004129879,0.0050202683,0.009874161,0.0017090435,0.0039697234,0.002947222],"category_scores_gemma":[0.052775204,0.0004560352,0.0006502198,0.005384905,0.012601943,0.004784559,0.007270411,0.0037803755,0.0005652291],"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":[0.0006272851,0.00015606932,0.10541965,0.0019429912,0.00022840622,0.002499097,0.08106782,0.0016320202,0.0021520474,0.39107898,0.022182204,0.3910134],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009309255,0.00042482035,0.39340195,0.005106084,0.00010862842,0.0023196738,0.073706895,0.0007385584,0.002990413,0.04582086,0.47504023,0.00024881304],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009184377,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008692168,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.045364123,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0045841313,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005343033,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23991132},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.09660485,0.031733315,0.005059315,0.8045606,0.0022536898,0.0000482644,0.00008214922,0.000026846023,0.059631012],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.89121467,0.007852896,0.0017119447,0.06789764,0.0009945564,0.000037062633,0.000034041797,0.000051704286,0.03020554],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98613423,0.0057168175,0.00039776845,0.0015062734,0.004014039,0.0022307916],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97667307,0.016180577,0.0012020565,0.00096140493,0.0035980672,0.0013848455],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016593916,0.00023673793,0.0005867411,0.0007878251,0.01780022,0.011083905,0.0013457995,0.0059289695,0.0022195978],"category_scores_gemma":[0.043004528,0.00027634832,0.0005334571,0.0009783952,0.035802525,0.007280457,0.0049955486,0.013754982,0.00027466696],"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":[0.00014696336,0.000029939507,0.011613581,0.00022603158,0.00005569844,0.0015690846,0.11407047,0.00060289743,0.0004179687,0.71760225,0.08534884,0.06831627],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002608981,0.000085432686,0.01341935,0.0011729661,0.000058082947,0.0004723412,0.11851036,0.00051448855,0.0011644543,0.25676212,0.60768455,0.00012970797],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.34515044,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5032717,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.34515044,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.021220438,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.036256928,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6862829},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.89091444,0.030534172,0.0038454165,0.0057441057,0.00024169982,0.00026978407,0.00036545808,0.000028808045,0.06805611],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9893156,0.006150153,0.0024281726,0.00028866922,0.00009356071,0.000026305808,0.00009410864,0.0000065491827,0.0015968814],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9681833,0.013891212,0.0020562583,0.0012130663,0.013621122,0.001035136],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7819372,0.13598895,0.032877527,0.004352826,0.042076312,0.0027671389],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03713287,0.00020820543,0.0006523743,0.00457644,0.002015135,0.003129095,0.0014687147,0.0015515619,0.0017552652],"category_scores_gemma":[0.24134892,0.00034829215,0.0003062031,0.0019025047,0.0034904014,0.0013899495,0.0021000716,0.0015742343,0.00025812353],"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":[0.00093603466,0.00016245367,0.52064735,0.0019610038,0.0004522213,0.0049577947,0.16673583,0.0012107715,0.008127642,0.04717576,0.011886412,0.23574679],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007135794,0.00055027753,0.81427544,0.0037246908,0.00033848247,0.004548926,0.062452514,0.0016206721,0.010329534,0.014771136,0.087059356,0.0002576923],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08011357,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1227336,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08011357,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0046611987,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00799599,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.19637978},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7279467,0.0067633586,0.0062960326,0.06737632,0.0003121642,0.00008085746,0.00008796553,0.000025940095,0.19111073],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9926392,0.000864823,0.0005904666,0.0016091936,0.000062847226,0.000019516045,0.000017949487,0.000009301474,0.0041866917],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98852074,0.003958257,0.0006603437,0.0009968401,0.0027380732,0.0031256748],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9862779,0.006540762,0.0014561678,0.0004098676,0.0037111656,0.0016041695],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01622825,0.00023150933,0.00043556208,0.0015936998,0.016596213,0.007279092,0.0011587385,0.0044369698,0.0018524006],"category_scores_gemma":[0.025842562,0.0005622084,0.00028314436,0.0013770787,0.028391395,0.0040841326,0.005225187,0.005975567,0.000160604],"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":[0.000096678115,0.00005855643,0.009280634,0.000056485816,0.000016876735,0.00082197087,0.09709137,0.0016240798,0.00033574583,0.86493284,0.004208784,0.021475965],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009886425,0.00015722799,0.06118351,0.0005639342,0.000027077362,0.0006997007,0.12819104,0.0022118571,0.0009988125,0.445205,0.36042926,0.00023363526],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.16302751,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.23206341,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.16302751,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03512898,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.029414361,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.32415718},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3697678,0.009219204,0.24556631,0.027209105,0.0128370095,0.005864239,0.0021148792,0.0036334204,0.32378802],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.717665,0.002941785,0.14382263,0.004940609,0.0022034904,0.0014457336,0.0018345738,0.00047983532,0.124666266],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9910568,0.002900976,0.0009825248,0.00131465,0.0026284303,0.0011166477],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98495007,0.0052765915,0.0012286322,0.002953841,0.0032951534,0.0022956913],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008917354,0.00092623034,0.002009929,0.0028606674,0.005657027,0.0036790941,0.0014651143,0.002445532,0.05509885],"category_scores_gemma":[0.046474308,0.000621865,0.0012195464,0.0010727068,0.0012476079,0.00309681,0.005898957,0.0027636453,0.015106398],"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":[0.0022919418,0.000602233,0.025424534,0.0005795751,0.00029349176,0.00161274,0.003504083,0.0034319488,0.007037994,0.050678562,0.08422979,0.8203131],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00044637732,0.0050465977,0.09109545,0.002006411,0.00082948816,0.0053366222,0.012557525,0.021749085,0.022403184,0.2063524,0.63147306,0.0007038254],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0019161016,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0046070768,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05509885,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0013739628,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005357469,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.18432403},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.036536783,0.10431068,0.0021902893,0.57409644,0.0042029596,0.00021798053,0.00032457933,0.000079871716,0.27804035],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6192476,0.05887713,0.0038774845,0.20786877,0.002396996,0.00038614892,0.00034350465,0.00010337463,0.10689904],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99278814,0.0042649466,0.00025555096,0.0005637205,0.0012466382,0.0008810293],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9876264,0.008812625,0.00055667333,0.00022411856,0.0019464733,0.0008337488],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.011073816,0.0002188595,0.00028146914,0.0010660741,0.008441283,0.0043515204,0.001645187,0.009036862,0.011699107],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02494466,0.0004746122,0.00035582276,0.00083592423,0.004145927,0.004370386,0.0021765812,0.008722377,0.001815147],"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":[0.0000772344,0.00010862214,0.004333561,0.00044591166,0.00003398672,0.0012630441,0.006225346,0.00023433733,0.000555777,0.2191175,0.6948159,0.07278875],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007694579,0.00014900649,0.01804306,0.0021597527,0.000092835406,0.000464375,0.023101088,0.00033152557,0.00083219237,0.02548497,0.92917985,0.0000843194],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08472616,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.18587787,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08472616,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00569108,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.014598869,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16846597},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7710059,0.003298987,0.025105763,0.098151416,0.00023729021,0.0004479518,0.00083790557,0.000059841903,0.10085489],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9889804,0.00068179134,0.0027681778,0.001280018,0.000059908074,0.00011695944,0.00008946987,0.000018567933,0.0060046613],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9726433,0.020768156,0.0015625568,0.001030081,0.0026847816,0.0013111437],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.68878496,0.28199235,0.008111443,0.0065799127,0.012772996,0.0017583831],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.044695165,0.00028058255,0.00046673106,0.003534934,0.012140661,0.009760403,0.0015101518,0.004182119,0.011988488],"category_scores_gemma":[0.19116922,0.0005519281,0.00032820605,0.006591561,0.011612923,0.008272596,0.004125606,0.00467028,0.0006533325],"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":[0.0005512737,0.00036330248,0.05378178,0.00042894782,0.00007256999,0.0009571887,0.12763575,0.0026037283,0.0012363723,0.6811004,0.03285265,0.09841603],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012858403,0.0005525846,0.1123044,0.0013384025,0.00012317559,0.0006654528,0.46402568,0.008684643,0.005172405,0.26120362,0.14554414,0.00025689928],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.05923986,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09010613,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05923986,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0073096356,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.010471941,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23637348},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.06546276,0.03187697,0.0015908633,0.5320758,0.0054273247,0.00009264259,0.00015235686,0.00014873274,0.36317262],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5071059,0.012231009,0.0023532084,0.29326037,0.0013749215,0.000050764193,0.00007421662,0.00009121804,0.18345842],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955231,0.0006576037,0.00012199937,0.0005736519,0.0021532362,0.00097036007],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9959791,0.001478287,0.00016629254,0.0002133142,0.0014734959,0.0006895671],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0049389508,0.0003518568,0.00043816795,0.00084334833,0.01593804,0.006251506,0.0016906736,0.012795944,0.006276436],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00917912,0.0005109359,0.00065885944,0.0005498669,0.012941939,0.0022731167,0.001682821,0.009613924,0.00083599275],"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":[0.0001482841,0.000071883725,0.012231653,0.00023168806,0.000072642135,0.007111649,0.017813424,0.0004063316,0.0026231124,0.35803574,0.5297247,0.071528845],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005161657,0.0001270672,0.014994973,0.0008988746,0.00005789786,0.0024071126,0.010970379,0.0004391959,0.0011576768,0.039529115,0.9292234,0.00014258943],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.82566005,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.93053466,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.98406196,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02088796,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03143368,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.35073328},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"methods","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":"methods","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0012809352,0.018055283,0.7930624,0.011568596,0.0056382655,0.0019597516,0.016825488,0.008205295,0.14340404],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.03587026,0.022850461,0.7780775,0.015670419,0.007981106,0.010373059,0.02151787,0.00716079,0.10049859],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98818725,0.004217898,0.0014259216,0.0027288974,0.0028699609,0.00057007687],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98119205,0.010774014,0.0009573266,0.0035408523,0.0029891548,0.0005466613],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009197286,0.0027873842,0.002298124,0.0048220456,0.002061209,0.010235121,0.007117805,0.004919942,0.16542597],"category_scores_gemma":[0.038100544,0.001514234,0.0036365949,0.005422639,0.0048473896,0.011643432,0.005673232,0.006436352,0.10028859],"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":[0.00011294923,0.00014550514,0.000918272,0.0022746676,0.00009571407,0.00028481774,0.0007461591,0.0019557788,0.000768726,0.658596,0.17649212,0.15760928],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002566693,0.000038341524,0.00023613157,0.0006681182,0.000025373392,0.00030448913,0.00017672795,0.0023237583,0.0002853987,0.4454922,0.55037683,0.00004686778],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0026669938,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0016702779,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.16542597,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0032297831,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0066090412,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.55340505},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.14277965,0.027453791,0.0037452022,0.322183,0.0011586444,0.00023801232,0.00038331142,0.00005753645,0.50200087],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.898674,0.018359452,0.004721636,0.030317528,0.00019446836,0.00012357792,0.00014152288,0.00006924329,0.047398537],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98862666,0.0023916778,0.00042991468,0.000909892,0.0034495909,0.0041922443],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9675992,0.015945345,0.00083896227,0.0009299325,0.01030677,0.004379821],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014734878,0.00040875011,0.0010608258,0.0019388803,0.018790618,0.014108944,0.0030262864,0.009050948,0.008716682],"category_scores_gemma":[0.051908687,0.00050828536,0.0006422299,0.0030578543,0.012959628,0.005489009,0.0049183853,0.010694121,0.0004115806],"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":[0.00027285604,0.00018495104,0.009919313,0.00031218276,0.00007566331,0.001700504,0.015780762,0.0019776628,0.0003088292,0.81396604,0.048788913,0.106712356],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00053456007,0.00022174137,0.037110005,0.0041602394,0.00037629082,0.00082472485,0.05179472,0.0061415085,0.0015251708,0.3048251,0.59185064,0.0006353224],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9866952,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9947925,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08929322,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.08929322,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.23339875,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.64787066},"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":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.05253252,0.015161524,0.0010514127,0.42218485,0.002154097,0.00008910484,0.0005943947,0.000050357925,0.5061818],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.29172787,0.0041319528,0.0007410109,0.03257374,0.0004085528,0.000076899174,0.00012661662,0.000128613,0.6700848],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9956806,0.0005911835,0.00016510322,0.0003571069,0.0013929795,0.0018129576],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99621177,0.0012181087,0.00025933102,0.00013105986,0.001235968,0.0009438434],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024766428,0.0003083275,0.00035821684,0.00068468694,0.030813264,0.009176305,0.0019315702,0.008641514,0.02675662],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007651643,0.0006321182,0.00037652947,0.0017324744,0.015515471,0.0038519038,0.0032683937,0.006898793,0.0019919702],"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":[0.00004242007,0.000023579767,0.0045508123,0.00016623586,0.000012514141,0.0008242063,0.1388433,0.00011725968,0.00040950414,0.35655785,0.47295585,0.025496405],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000010462226,0.000008729179,0.011572631,0.00015456189,0.000007945606,0.000090499554,0.02800995,0.00006449079,0.00014283,0.005594616,0.9543066,0.000036759033],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.98360014,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99712545,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07892135,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.07892135,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.14352031,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5726172},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.004874827,0.031192433,0.001908308,0.06082824,0.001955535,0.00011545373,0.00062276,0.000051505693,0.89845103],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.13277064,0.0066527906,0.0015131822,0.024661353,0.0006167086,0.00011213695,0.00017853115,0.000066482244,0.83342826],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9967849,0.00063105347,0.000128351,0.000350013,0.0010460126,0.0010596223],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99831486,0.00063423975,0.00008334854,0.00006013994,0.00072848174,0.00017908162],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024978574,0.0009984048,0.00044939018,0.0016859551,0.012205413,0.007335205,0.0014063544,0.0128893545,0.016982412],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0066798157,0.0008300229,0.0006056553,0.0020908993,0.009849457,0.0022740988,0.0016429214,0.0069128806,0.002718201],"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":[0.000008146762,0.0000106058615,0.00025176746,0.000032891152,0.0000037543552,0.000070020455,0.0027251388,0.00026827355,0.00003556982,0.85927457,0.13087885,0.0064402916],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000014074851,0.000008174966,0.003406152,0.00027559442,0.000014102946,0.000041012274,0.0014004277,0.00023312987,0.00014693307,0.0700195,0.9243962,0.000044716988],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9315818,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9758111,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.068418205,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.059331384,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.07858319,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.43048137},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.20504348,0.0053921524,0.071841754,0.0358184,0.0006537329,0.00022194943,0.00013206145,0.00005365913,0.6808427],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97580725,0.0010760695,0.006231862,0.0007134049,0.00018920591,0.000044798402,0.00003574707,0.000014645168,0.01588705],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98944306,0.0053722784,0.00066637824,0.0012041151,0.0024865223,0.00082756556],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9720914,0.020604294,0.0021573717,0.0017565773,0.0027008858,0.0006895483],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.015516287,0.00038576708,0.0006559773,0.0021852239,0.00494631,0.010008179,0.0022886568,0.0042217034,0.007399598],"category_scores_gemma":[0.043014083,0.00055517926,0.00051498757,0.00092904276,0.027796976,0.0069883023,0.0047824658,0.004155034,0.0008616676],"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":[0.000034474775,0.000028925933,0.0009692741,0.00016083034,0.000026312207,0.00063784095,0.022896525,0.00075141626,0.00035003302,0.95777816,0.0013917624,0.014974526],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003661142,0.00007617758,0.002281372,0.00044701528,0.00006786763,0.0003305137,0.016232917,0.0018447957,0.00085478096,0.9459999,0.03178118,0.000046758265],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.020419009,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.019127892,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.020419009,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004455921,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006282726,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08205891},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9969168,0.00008536387,0.000491405,0.00014074016,0.00001721858,0.000021488522,0.000011560183,0.0000049519986,0.0023104937],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99924904,0.00005810568,0.0003051863,0.000047907368,0.000016219154,0.00001297692,0.0000129604205,0.0000028691643,0.00029465643],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9911991,0.005659951,0.00054116565,0.00056348095,0.0016473368,0.00038897747],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96199965,0.018531155,0.012921073,0.0018231889,0.0028214683,0.0019035777],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008380568,0.0003043007,0.0003573181,0.0009589919,0.0015657821,0.0027430516,0.00027938827,0.00067387446,0.002927702],"category_scores_gemma":[0.055053417,0.00030912485,0.00035200713,0.00035452406,0.0014415132,0.0012990173,0.0018847183,0.0010311455,0.00024530795],"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":[0.004188444,0.0014741262,0.685172,0.0004998229,0.00056526036,0.0012171097,0.15445057,0.0010495404,0.049462114,0.004943269,0.0015932661,0.09538445],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006895258,0.0005701444,0.9476228,0.00014192016,0.000085943175,0.00030295883,0.04329259,0.0012923204,0.0025689527,0.0020609887,0.0018930377,0.00009944438],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002309371,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0030278019,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.008380568,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00067160325,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005960217,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04432118},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9980294,0.00012130207,0.0003245212,0.00010562724,0.000007703273,0.000014761743,0.0000064045234,0.0000017553062,0.0013885943],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99950576,0.000056955105,0.00019560898,0.000042914835,0.000009530079,0.0000104586325,0.000008366754,0.0000016403123,0.0001687183],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9915624,0.0054987255,0.00054493244,0.00047206812,0.001543303,0.00037863865],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9469046,0.036405135,0.010901236,0.0013758189,0.002461433,0.0019517235],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009615612,0.00025007513,0.00032974628,0.00084600685,0.001129755,0.002564696,0.0002910505,0.00066935236,0.0027487369],"category_scores_gemma":[0.072334684,0.00026542583,0.0002732182,0.0002937532,0.0019613963,0.0012755527,0.001765425,0.0006708416,0.00022225418],"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":[0.0052144392,0.0007879348,0.64522576,0.0005810637,0.00045976313,0.001373007,0.21044199,0.0009740206,0.040427405,0.0030385212,0.0009926794,0.090483375],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010804322,0.0012336492,0.8939221,0.00017608235,0.00011672512,0.0008456645,0.093559094,0.0013923822,0.0031134833,0.0028268963,0.002587764,0.000118127515],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0012989764,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002493852,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009615612,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00071075535,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00066971034,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.050852835},"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":"incentives","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":"incentives","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.96722347,0.0021665248,0.00015868308,0.0057684695,0.00005392647,0.00005442058,0.014114575,0.00003346998,0.010426549],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99043673,0.0018877978,0.00014970428,0.00027246343,0.0000343344,0.000020627385,0.003909969,0.0000074672253,0.00328082],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99737775,0.00020634376,0.00014499099,0.00016431058,0.0014721944,0.0006345116],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9751482,0.0019479727,0.0040652505,0.00024226695,0.00881362,0.009782651],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0029383013,0.00019669493,0.0003728104,0.004330729,0.0030398185,0.0018838046,0.0014029385,0.0007789822,0.0033583047],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012669857,0.00023061775,0.00038217436,0.00819574,0.0010954249,0.0008292801,0.0019850763,0.0015441227,0.0004914166],"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":[0.000100435995,0.00009127018,0.96622735,0.00012222624,0.00006889383,0.000040566923,0.0035025815,0.00035340877,0.00008446073,0.0009815745,0.015226743,0.01320054],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000034757745,0.000012444426,0.9933877,0.000030898394,0.0000072058883,0.000010790694,0.0028233486,0.00009585053,0.000038508904,0.00003739829,0.003540516,0.000011856845],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9815124,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9931035,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.99706167,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.023887968,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.056821376,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17332017},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.10322606,0.039882597,0.19626424,0.1469024,0.00083355315,0.00023419336,0.00015635569,0.0001121487,0.5123884],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.95901984,0.010907564,0.02299722,0.0024337645,0.0007083422,0.00019633699,0.000050797033,0.00005745429,0.0036287566],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9899939,0.005595161,0.0003841402,0.0009841962,0.0022501552,0.00079253817],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9787335,0.015963081,0.0017234045,0.0010138558,0.0018446915,0.0007214748],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.013320303,0.00053617824,0.0006127803,0.008367624,0.0047285575,0.016122181,0.0029239962,0.007020785,0.005080806],"category_scores_gemma":[0.020164182,0.0005558181,0.0007837046,0.0064768447,0.07251,0.022624608,0.0045901346,0.0061610015,0.00049788074],"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":[0.0000037326693,0.000007760973,0.00019655123,0.000020828154,0.000001187763,0.000020172905,0.0011726256,0.00016405908,0.00002364169,0.9958454,0.00014430413,0.0023997098],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000009806497,0.000024872259,0.0009797794,0.00019302957,0.0000074748327,0.00008360433,0.0030151412,0.0029962272,0.000091325615,0.9831525,0.009431145,0.0000151312015],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005330832,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0056016343,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9878618,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012138189,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008949438,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08806914},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.08268097,0.016837712,0.20496105,0.31380013,0.0029163524,0.0007011538,0.0003805264,0.0001544703,0.3775677],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8977831,0.0052312287,0.050849836,0.03367201,0.001196326,0.00038738127,0.00016983814,0.00011007275,0.010600195],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.8977996,0.04250614,0.0043550474,0.007066762,0.041955557,0.0063169044],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8204741,0.13550918,0.007931471,0.008765508,0.02378316,0.003536671],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08201141,0.0009551657,0.0018326098,0.011895283,0.017367069,0.029471293,0.0070481338,0.011547242,0.0051562027],"category_scores_gemma":[0.19548436,0.0012852938,0.0009587498,0.0062292893,0.07412226,0.025118647,0.016294045,0.014915595,0.000901668],"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":[0.000027192424,0.000018252596,0.0020719308,0.00017453055,0.000022834856,0.0003030384,0.012634128,0.00029947478,0.000103931205,0.96245694,0.0035761022,0.018311746],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006301413,0.000052586045,0.0053148307,0.0021445472,0.000068013185,0.00021887984,0.0239514,0.0031705084,0.0005820676,0.8658094,0.0985125,0.000112277216],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.26078528,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.27086326,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.26078528,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03631624,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.05535549,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.51853466},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9883485,0.00047431802,0.00039561387,0.0003426155,0.000017425247,0.00001933678,0.00003581438,0.000004611664,0.010361754],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.998281,0.00022352891,0.0001688389,0.000031946125,0.000015107272,0.0000069407315,0.000027019454,0.0000018321749,0.00124383],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9985575,0.0008322486,0.00007010294,0.00009623678,0.00035672105,0.000087107095],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9856655,0.010418146,0.002469505,0.00037699862,0.00075477397,0.0003149629],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021402512,0.00015220781,0.00011857939,0.0007207999,0.00069184636,0.0012377211,0.00023148439,0.0003371249,0.006303209],"category_scores_gemma":[0.021693056,0.000101545455,0.000079840785,0.00029766516,0.00075639866,0.0005313744,0.0005964621,0.0004033029,0.0007772371],"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":[0.0007019462,0.00042209896,0.67106396,0.00025621356,0.0000563421,0.0052370974,0.11212115,0.00050653325,0.006498352,0.0029236535,0.0052270084,0.19498567],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00000886133,0.00021839591,0.89504474,0.00028097254,0.00003121944,0.0023777706,0.09154371,0.0006926279,0.0021907305,0.0016903494,0.00588202,0.00003859309],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0021872844,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0018400458,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.006303209,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00026176145,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00018767445,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.021086395},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.16805749,0.026656909,0.031182522,0.055263687,0.0020729718,0.0003663429,0.00031691205,0.00013089282,0.7159523],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9543359,0.0022002673,0.0035244182,0.0037284005,0.00046337701,0.00017742596,0.000058409187,0.000039191753,0.035472624],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.975317,0.0155483,0.0011793014,0.0025916453,0.0039911573,0.0013725666],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97981673,0.012987221,0.0025220227,0.0015826579,0.0017932606,0.00129808],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02315627,0.00022481065,0.0006719025,0.002853291,0.008164913,0.010423162,0.0013829317,0.00422675,0.008297011],"category_scores_gemma":[0.050467838,0.00036878526,0.00033178655,0.0023816593,0.021900412,0.005707942,0.004986382,0.004208268,0.0010033982],"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":[0.000079580976,0.000037887705,0.0023361482,0.00012600952,0.000014684278,0.00020790461,0.007878315,0.00023739986,0.00029477009,0.9581913,0.004370705,0.026225308],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005415411,0.00022488453,0.012422663,0.0011454978,0.000040582614,0.0003822942,0.013535576,0.001030435,0.0012180359,0.57315606,0.39668307,0.00010682096],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0030918724,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004227244,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02315627,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0052828724,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0073711406,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.122463524},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.969441,0.0051131467,0.0006347863,0.0027786442,0.00021128623,0.00015357744,0.0000790111,0.000006905954,0.021581518],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9959039,0.001202753,0.00026542493,0.00093695207,0.00011616741,0.00011498869,0.00005243166,0.000005352397,0.0014021335],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.96568364,0.01815628,0.002691591,0.0014301442,0.008958636,0.0030796707],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.91920984,0.0564804,0.01074374,0.0021219954,0.008201582,0.0032424554],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.033856545,0.00018693329,0.00083711074,0.0027803075,0.0055217603,0.004280968,0.0011014789,0.0019366181,0.004195282],"category_scores_gemma":[0.13583638,0.00024087999,0.0006652263,0.002021701,0.0033371053,0.0021011261,0.0044829035,0.001562792,0.0004196037],"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":[0.0051348396,0.001100557,0.38814685,0.002236492,0.0019804682,0.0037498549,0.26262292,0.0015252773,0.004488414,0.06247775,0.018780833,0.2477557],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00016849204,0.0021346903,0.76870745,0.0016137109,0.0005740063,0.0010336844,0.17210028,0.0010350466,0.0015414873,0.010675473,0.04021139,0.00020430084],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010389715,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.040791247,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.033856545,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0035323952,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005897548,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17905265},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.46142268,0.005016301,0.0038956618,0.3233348,0.0007921778,0.00024273754,0.00042038877,0.00005533355,0.2048199],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9821836,0.0005990283,0.00079871167,0.006579573,0.00010477377,0.000030877018,0.000033032884,0.000022370341,0.009647992],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.96433043,0.007781811,0.00084523327,0.0024272872,0.0077203424,0.0168949],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94066167,0.032210983,0.003280707,0.0017605189,0.011186901,0.010899196],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.026458608,0.00044054224,0.0016741395,0.0021590814,0.030152962,0.015475477,0.0044573336,0.015869308,0.009815182],"category_scores_gemma":[0.11762829,0.00073964836,0.00076406443,0.003197838,0.016672581,0.004258621,0.007318734,0.01311289,0.0005078062],"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":[0.00052115606,0.00020458699,0.039229084,0.0002245492,0.0001954571,0.0014891028,0.03560634,0.0067900172,0.00039452745,0.77972174,0.08793451,0.047688935],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00063673535,0.00020741134,0.107936926,0.0010100699,0.0004252502,0.0005629756,0.098388635,0.020517351,0.0012203315,0.52929384,0.23911682,0.0006837147],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9872593,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99357927,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.13058588,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.13058588,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.36918777,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9474713},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00094795227,0.0049000983,0.0005003043,0.0044960445,0.0029177608,0.0004262237,0.07445549,0.00071359135,0.91064245],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.005906118,0.007826872,0.0012560857,0.0016719436,0.00037757467,0.00020639092,0.04912135,0.00034685907,0.9332867],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9960098,0.00016597794,0.00015874018,0.00032112698,0.0025380098,0.00080631825],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99083626,0.0004981557,0.00021308499,0.00037085038,0.0074517876,0.00062995276],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013117316,0.0015571653,0.0010412064,0.026126835,0.012911323,0.0068210308,0.004132849,0.002357715,0.34362128],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008308295,0.0010935757,0.0011398031,0.03225863,0.0016485159,0.0021429076,0.0018292913,0.0023872342,0.096158385],"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":[0.0000039420243,0.0000042160227,0.0000801752,0.00005791194,0.0000010113707,0.000023515895,0.00006261726,0.000032636945,0.000015947942,0.0030184211,0.986808,0.009891512],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000023813927,0.0000014098619,0.0013274265,0.00012080449,0.0000037379948,0.000034240995,0.0001754242,0.000032051208,0.00003117375,0.00049496215,0.99776566,0.000010681206],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9723795,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9865428,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.34362128,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.047621552,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.11671038,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9362446},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"methods","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":"methods","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.01645894,0.013987677,0.61319613,0.30959013,0.004192153,0.002441995,0.00008974843,0.0007221708,0.039320998],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.2579207,0.0076777376,0.6759939,0.04448272,0.0030528416,0.0031970309,0.000102031816,0.00041757492,0.007155446],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.5193273,0.25743696,0.06290181,0.020460676,0.12944826,0.010425038],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.2901111,0.49459815,0.06620074,0.053266373,0.08909078,0.0067329095],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.5694757,0.0012065598,0.0025117227,0.007303127,0.012357987,0.02925186,0.011713847,0.03306351,0.0016650185],"category_scores_gemma":[0.5844897,0.0021072929,0.0019703514,0.002449452,0.03234275,0.027566869,0.01094337,0.02876035,0.0018592073],"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":[0.00015051613,0.00039038213,0.0041425764,0.0018191267,0.00020544352,0.0008704126,0.022111138,0.005927875,0.0039061902,0.60495764,0.045171328,0.3103473],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00033279834,0.0005538425,0.0055138348,0.008413097,0.00021468334,0.0013989969,0.007499048,0.008160858,0.009196595,0.7015791,0.25616008,0.0009771447],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006356892,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007925841,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.987642,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011407853,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.061246037,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5309131},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"methods","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0016211261,0.014911167,0.10342044,0.7734806,0.029481761,0.0024270832,0.00028567202,0.00033836166,0.0740338],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0515572,0.024748817,0.40238342,0.38658702,0.054428607,0.00781403,0.000715402,0.00034067046,0.07142477],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.88259023,0.05075121,0.010979345,0.009837337,0.040173627,0.005668157],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8754349,0.07241904,0.0047593745,0.00913012,0.027720895,0.010535682],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.15422761,0.0017643992,0.0020116733,0.00921974,0.007968581,0.027536644,0.008951159,0.06988877,0.009551294],"category_scores_gemma":[0.17428274,0.002737308,0.006818548,0.003655372,0.02915975,0.042764556,0.01626126,0.03735337,0.0058479668],"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":[0.000015787597,0.00012392482,0.0001192336,0.00029864017,0.000013949669,0.00032128755,0.00037043827,0.00046735213,0.00024452692,0.94618696,0.033812307,0.018025588],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00015798019,0.00013523966,0.0002343239,0.0015856668,0.000037216276,0.00035857898,0.00048312073,0.0013293058,0.0002679664,0.5500635,0.44524366,0.00010349939],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008704535,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004680154,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15422761,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.016949058,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.08991388,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8156433},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9892238,0.00028999188,0.00023316818,0.00038248076,0.000034554552,0.000086398206,0.00006651525,0.000008756795,0.009674411],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978823,0.00020697154,0.000547381,0.00011414695,0.000019677518,0.000028246317,0.00006545463,0.0000060480147,0.0011297537],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99525636,0.0014738372,0.00021489375,0.00036403188,0.002187291,0.0005035113],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9751221,0.01168721,0.005564238,0.00071430014,0.0053915586,0.0015205775],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0046196887,0.00041213696,0.0003518615,0.001896642,0.00549869,0.00331921,0.0006404988,0.0007959044,0.0041455487],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06638944,0.0003289949,0.00033869693,0.00085504923,0.0017059175,0.0006768862,0.001555504,0.0007867028,0.00033128558],"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":[0.0048631253,0.00082586554,0.7187892,0.0005189644,0.00044214295,0.0012301594,0.08674304,0.0011901559,0.025261538,0.0040225526,0.004647929,0.15146528],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000893751,0.00024748172,0.9661285,0.0001837191,0.0001601745,0.00015847184,0.022172414,0.0011534313,0.0024559377,0.0010066136,0.0061106337,0.00013317271],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5811957,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.75643426,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4188043,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0076573547,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.012870136,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8425414},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.61325616,0.031895753,0.001685467,0.06298696,0.0012459289,0.00004545196,0.00008687503,0.000015669444,0.2887817],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9707111,0.004047664,0.00027085454,0.006448144,0.00038659765,0.000034714507,0.000022472655,0.000018208946,0.018060243],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9823642,0.0071738744,0.0011048366,0.0015673621,0.0040246705,0.0037652026],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98785967,0.0055323415,0.0022167682,0.0004986923,0.002151397,0.0017411016],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.022261305,0.0002478099,0.0008358016,0.002230889,0.018959083,0.008458899,0.0010505875,0.0036736678,0.0061220936],"category_scores_gemma":[0.030047316,0.0004108311,0.0002846965,0.0014819123,0.035628103,0.0045058215,0.007871432,0.004862853,0.000614965],"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":[0.00019091705,0.000114062896,0.010326733,0.000158918,0.000020324283,0.00071167084,0.36525953,0.00011504765,0.000577294,0.5845543,0.0058642193,0.03210693],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005727954,0.0002984798,0.044994287,0.001265566,0.000015735899,0.0008314798,0.14943595,0.00011838018,0.0010019618,0.101730496,0.70013386,0.0001165681],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.032418888,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.053001385,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.032418888,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012668461,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009681342,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.11773044},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.08062355,0.0013385321,0.8678725,0.00761341,0.00026727532,0.0006083277,0.00044497757,0.00063952716,0.040591918],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.62964725,0.0005519675,0.36525047,0.0008949334,0.0001945524,0.0007709129,0.00036162644,0.00016641711,0.002161849],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.8980122,0.07279509,0.003978612,0.005344804,0.01845539,0.0014139283],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.66326016,0.29883283,0.009089163,0.01674356,0.010672743,0.0014015307],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.056867022,0.00095759635,0.0015061701,0.008103735,0.004461805,0.008836536,0.003142972,0.0038887057,0.0066002],"category_scores_gemma":[0.25222927,0.0009736129,0.0025460348,0.0030014692,0.02740131,0.018837253,0.007229734,0.006108976,0.000678984],"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":[0.00013466632,0.00013462445,0.0031638062,0.00044561917,0.000119541,0.00013477563,0.0032074898,0.00411681,0.0008991794,0.95569444,0.00070159015,0.031247454],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008013331,0.000072236275,0.001333365,0.00022001938,0.000049195227,0.00009689152,0.0011155433,0.020382028,0.0018761536,0.96907806,0.005651544,0.000044768294],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0048146597,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0031911905,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.056867022,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005396612,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007911561,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.30074513},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.04446366,0.024681885,0.21831307,0.10468978,0.003628124,0.00013039271,0.00017410642,0.00014006946,0.60377896],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.90957594,0.0074398695,0.03998705,0.011849412,0.0020973098,0.0002217495,0.00007381081,0.00016202914,0.0285927],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9896466,0.0064061303,0.0005330376,0.0010046661,0.0018516699,0.0005579786],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97234976,0.022623302,0.0012766365,0.0013765857,0.0019009288,0.00047269126],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012209547,0.00066682085,0.0009541629,0.0028705334,0.0041199718,0.007838148,0.0011938688,0.0045913677,0.0046279277],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02924562,0.0003323932,0.0007872878,0.0015086763,0.03146841,0.017624406,0.004854196,0.006972324,0.001026328],"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":[0.000008426911,0.0000025601337,0.000037132413,0.000030155665,0.0000023761058,0.00003496864,0.0011691763,0.00008378036,0.000050409715,0.9954993,0.000604064,0.0024775397],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008248201,0.000020104475,0.000086985085,0.0001742271,0.000009777837,0.000075505515,0.0005623377,0.00028865685,0.00027552235,0.9534349,0.045049593,0.0000141712435],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010074654,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00081931666,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.012209547,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0027191448,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0022166534,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06457102},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9958248,0.00008895623,0.00038446503,0.00016110226,0.000008485863,0.000021944232,0.000010204743,0.0000021950584,0.0034978057],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991246,0.00007922621,0.00045389,0.000049473783,0.000006459817,0.000011875292,0.000012687186,0.0000019638935,0.0002598555],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99440986,0.0041822856,0.0002060396,0.00029176698,0.0006060052,0.00030410572],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9804315,0.013899104,0.003870807,0.0004553899,0.0005529359,0.0007902491],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0051386966,0.00020424364,0.00027600944,0.00045678244,0.0009133353,0.002115182,0.0001858304,0.0005882664,0.003094145],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03541613,0.00017543232,0.00029568296,0.00018087194,0.00075920846,0.00082100055,0.0011106277,0.0006004337,0.0002061654],"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":[0.009226848,0.0020738398,0.5985212,0.0009325268,0.0007987621,0.0026876961,0.058225803,0.006414841,0.12450567,0.007828149,0.0025758867,0.18620887],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012636291,0.0016374417,0.9370172,0.00033707317,0.00025652177,0.0005742197,0.032872003,0.008126424,0.009647975,0.005476294,0.0038132253,0.00011522803],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0025265827,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0052111475,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0051386966,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005587834,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006231471,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.02717632},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7402004,0.004710488,0.168631,0.019821415,0.0009068133,0.008725323,0.0038127997,0.00035082875,0.052841026],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9397724,0.00094265316,0.04435231,0.002687836,0.00011728471,0.008627001,0.0005353583,0.00021274613,0.0027523246],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.81842226,0.14932105,0.00513009,0.0078088725,0.015656311,0.0036614216],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6017582,0.3514611,0.011437406,0.010374336,0.023381315,0.0015876932],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.16115102,0.0010095609,0.001861409,0.012845594,0.00501363,0.012129004,0.0022266645,0.001784078,0.0046674325],"category_scores_gemma":[0.23817612,0.00073574105,0.00097017473,0.012449102,0.015607117,0.009933975,0.008351031,0.0028304965,0.0005897057],"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":[0.000179812,0.00019506853,0.01907825,0.0028352533,0.00015037287,0.00038022592,0.88817453,0.00043571275,0.0015913061,0.027531873,0.0035330483,0.05591444],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000034118228,0.00015939042,0.020156126,0.003052441,0.00006904835,0.00016262745,0.92401326,0.002023018,0.0014662207,0.029181093,0.01957414,0.00010846164],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004603114,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0056237653,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.16115102,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008480194,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0065324563,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.85225827},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5088869,0.09901683,0.025349734,0.09837278,0.0023427673,0.0076514725,0.0017587454,0.00013623829,0.2564846],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97744036,0.003909878,0.0064102886,0.0052172793,0.0006167408,0.0010281326,0.00021017787,0.000018699906,0.0051485305],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.81362873,0.12100672,0.005477959,0.0038200344,0.04678484,0.009281758],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6561465,0.27148002,0.025080755,0.009339583,0.032863565,0.005089479],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.15276584,0.0006662282,0.0019354232,0.0055564023,0.005135122,0.006531021,0.0026768402,0.006929336,0.0041793496],"category_scores_gemma":[0.39909285,0.00079073803,0.0019552957,0.0069694268,0.013291593,0.0064375135,0.0041737747,0.005932956,0.00047009566],"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":[0.004174453,0.0007839179,0.092015766,0.0020378176,0.0015678566,0.0002744814,0.0049629477,0.020383194,0.0004750639,0.681532,0.04365021,0.14814234],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.005712387,0.008702711,0.35007688,0.0036687686,0.0044415984,0.00036130522,0.008517644,0.032469694,0.005531295,0.4099871,0.16989331,0.000637365],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1947332,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.36425513,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9508033,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0491967,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.05826805,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.80791265},"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":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0022917462,0.6183811,0.0063591115,0.07487366,0.010385198,0.00011787413,0.00042162059,0.00008026482,0.28708932],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.04279315,0.76960886,0.007067596,0.033700604,0.016625186,0.00028299322,0.0005513482,0.00017250907,0.12919775],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9957496,0.0018594277,0.0005496306,0.000669704,0.0008643621,0.0003072531],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99184823,0.005764383,0.00040192014,0.00030998225,0.0010277431,0.0006477754],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004446773,0.0005467547,0.00045758716,0.0036179998,0.004357487,0.005363851,0.0014092717,0.0057072197,0.021754466],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012473554,0.0005702372,0.00036764142,0.0043057245,0.0054156873,0.008485227,0.0036583531,0.0074448166,0.012792969],"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":[0.00006943581,0.000095805975,0.0014551096,0.0021389541,0.000010788899,0.0013396223,0.0061317785,0.00026924085,0.0005113369,0.28251693,0.22327048,0.4821905],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000010117819,0.000015776961,0.00029298107,0.0009697691,0.0000015330693,0.0005629195,0.00035265324,0.000016920412,0.0000671376,0.0095966775,0.9881143,0.000008355173],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0059883455,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0069770906,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.99564254,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004088965,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0041669286,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07277596},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99807006,0.00007365723,0.00008968518,0.000074407166,0.0000054405655,0.000018299168,0.000010264982,0.0000015398626,0.0016566685],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9990969,0.00008484635,0.00021440358,0.000032741766,0.0000037929624,0.000011090163,0.000019346071,0.0000014237479,0.0005355177],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977241,0.0010310255,0.00012833712,0.00019984272,0.00061806187,0.00029859258],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9857099,0.0082768295,0.003163607,0.00054293254,0.0013835091,0.0009231912],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0034062625,0.0002063711,0.0002026414,0.000447508,0.0020287402,0.0016341801,0.000304149,0.00046116186,0.0029544327],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03349132,0.0001704461,0.000254642,0.00027010782,0.00131933,0.00045037008,0.0010423557,0.00057589443,0.00017438314],"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":[0.0030474882,0.0007108645,0.8140719,0.00023423196,0.0002655644,0.0010261064,0.08735598,0.00082947384,0.018985251,0.001518626,0.0012576052,0.0706969],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003132039,0.00034273125,0.96781206,0.00009769218,0.000073806514,0.00012872808,0.027152063,0.0008295943,0.0015235179,0.0006269026,0.0013349723,0.000046617508],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.20942184,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.43850106,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.20942184,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002083875,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004091255,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.41640574},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9979996,0.00004421552,0.000039432867,0.00029542434,0.000010620847,0.0000141296905,0.000008030067,0.0000011766474,0.0015874626],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9993038,0.000047614154,0.00008469114,0.00011336516,0.000011614295,0.000011433293,0.000013088798,0.0000017558154,0.0004126775],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9943955,0.0035377392,0.00036348673,0.0003325001,0.00077959517,0.0005911975],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9698388,0.01282307,0.010447715,0.00094424875,0.0022082974,0.0037379381],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0068654227,0.00013457405,0.00026136867,0.00036299127,0.0023855893,0.0022907169,0.00042718268,0.00087327074,0.0038770812],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05534122,0.00023693348,0.00036115822,0.00030872636,0.0013221313,0.0007009319,0.0012026466,0.0014698467,0.00037490495],"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":[0.008782322,0.0033346459,0.86633414,0.00012637692,0.00038539935,0.0011557934,0.048760194,0.0011779148,0.006620847,0.0018099905,0.0029131018,0.058599293],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001350375,0.00081551005,0.97419286,0.000094750416,0.000081623206,0.0001486681,0.020746974,0.0010747529,0.0005045162,0.00088397664,0.0012711303,0.000050178904],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03098379,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.073944986,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03098379,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0017219417,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0023853874,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.061606944},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.039555516,0.0057356525,0.0029039069,0.9008059,0.0039332826,0.00033998373,0.00008137527,0.00010817114,0.04653626],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5187127,0.0044450853,0.01026513,0.41700128,0.004250745,0.00037752715,0.00010114704,0.00010806662,0.044738356],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9443488,0.016443877,0.0031797844,0.004141223,0.015877154,0.016009092],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.89792556,0.05355892,0.0040723886,0.0039431592,0.024676682,0.015823282],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.074387826,0.00034864314,0.0011171327,0.0020656658,0.022900507,0.013925055,0.0057634264,0.024829024,0.0035253358],"category_scores_gemma":[0.13601585,0.0007067308,0.0007437851,0.0017646117,0.015506661,0.0045609735,0.0044136993,0.01802091,0.00077742076],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00030696296,0.00022381856,0.0134582445,0.00046613553,0.00009578039,0.003168372,0.04286041,0.00304039,0.0019490133,0.35439447,0.43948516,0.14055122],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00029334717,0.00033496282,0.04729245,0.001902472,0.00012299194,0.00086528924,0.038814582,0.002279864,0.001955149,0.07104714,0.8345276,0.000564233],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6665826,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.86766654,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94430953,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.055690464,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.15125999,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.67076194},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.96251357,0.0005103747,0.0010579461,0.002975007,0.00009945529,0.0000285434,0.00025065488,0.000014456996,0.032549895],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99826956,0.0001163793,0.00035893868,0.00036500656,0.000076029406,0.00001199037,0.00009572853,0.00000843118,0.0006978907],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99638414,0.001438215,0.00030198146,0.00063306995,0.0009777436,0.00026488642],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7518931,0.17843407,0.037173547,0.01837632,0.0099916095,0.0041314047],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008101259,0.00029138007,0.00030916522,0.001045995,0.0006894716,0.0018478929,0.0012704567,0.0026109123,0.046133276],"category_scores_gemma":[0.11363135,0.00037130702,0.0003429644,0.0006648891,0.0035521295,0.0022170332,0.0013205927,0.0023365172,0.0016666657],"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":[0.022045536,0.0054829894,0.82719177,0.0011955939,0.0012741021,0.001622807,0.01005689,0.001176958,0.009738932,0.041267604,0.0036964675,0.075250305],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009849609,0.0022237296,0.9542634,0.00027435998,0.0004455111,0.0015408975,0.004060131,0.0018913882,0.003160318,0.026483195,0.004607776,0.00006441344],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0011768013,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009203276,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.046133276,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000408568,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005585933,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1543312},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.36234182,0.10239946,0.011954508,0.060140382,0.0019375115,0.00015608048,0.00022140097,0.00005238899,0.46079642],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9202782,0.020153493,0.0019217352,0.0026369235,0.00050140574,0.00004836117,0.000041171512,0.000051890092,0.054366954],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99587077,0.0020907952,0.0002717937,0.00034694767,0.0008122592,0.00060745946],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99450314,0.0032031524,0.0004480125,0.00014984459,0.0013123784,0.00038344195],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007761685,0.0001371332,0.00031169088,0.0017801871,0.004649303,0.005145478,0.0006261282,0.0012078609,0.0035807295],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01281232,0.00037751626,0.00011373693,0.0013301217,0.010848377,0.002173826,0.0024362411,0.0019968657,0.00058267696],"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":[0.000114890565,0.000052642386,0.007606981,0.00039464023,0.000013102389,0.0011082704,0.09390766,0.00040151697,0.0008519134,0.8087557,0.010160551,0.07663213],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000017982096,0.000076279845,0.03269037,0.0011150228,0.00001542341,0.00037285627,0.025020562,0.00033263915,0.0008302583,0.029890724,0.90956455,0.00007340155],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07105905,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.110847116,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07105905,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009931448,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008133086,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1412909},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9990416,0.000062221065,0.000058254565,0.000019789897,0.0000095117,0.0000042307256,0.000014627197,0.000002339459,0.0007873218],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9994561,0.000025517167,0.000059972415,0.000012500951,0.00001305622,0.0000034679872,0.000015869437,0.000004704984,0.00040870515],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986362,0.0005359026,0.00014585684,0.00023977632,0.00025604875,0.00018620609],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9273655,0.059926193,0.0060856454,0.0020005004,0.0022484423,0.002373658],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002248749,0.00023864613,0.00042694062,0.00043803555,0.0004920238,0.0014881401,0.00037808352,0.0008944154,0.0072905063],"category_scores_gemma":[0.049983066,0.00023478185,0.00035230356,0.0002664817,0.00059102324,0.000815065,0.00059733936,0.0008679235,0.0006511891],"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":[0.041050106,0.0025895997,0.8149945,0.00017489101,0.00048593283,0.0019990457,0.0061859046,0.0013769554,0.09474393,0.000550769,0.00065001217,0.035198323],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000059454804,0.0009010718,0.9937987,0.000015738338,0.000097630036,0.0003156728,0.0006190549,0.0010214659,0.0028052235,0.00017796486,0.00016429185,0.000023704042],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003363491,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005105851,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0072905063,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004956937,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006293938,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.024389207},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.015020681,0.045843147,0.12193817,0.7717756,0.011879374,0.00014987234,0.00025318845,0.00041186207,0.03272804],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.70640785,0.021496538,0.10866784,0.10722974,0.040927798,0.00072869146,0.00024264905,0.00040752112,0.013891441],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.946727,0.040710196,0.0032922046,0.0017471914,0.0069328845,0.0005904683],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6868881,0.27961686,0.007518965,0.0065305466,0.016605461,0.002840029],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08244543,0.0008602848,0.0023709824,0.0034872252,0.0012680315,0.009642897,0.002582724,0.007948286,0.0064540375],"category_scores_gemma":[0.46633005,0.0006076664,0.0011639483,0.0017359069,0.008825041,0.011528584,0.0019623262,0.008172562,0.0028617082],"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":[0.0007013273,0.00019347422,0.017675163,0.0018827138,0.0004088639,0.0007427461,0.0018776099,0.0025392629,0.0006072538,0.37213165,0.14646704,0.45477295],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002372513,0.00043775956,0.010609504,0.004135271,0.00031830074,0.0051877513,0.004051602,0.0135373,0.0012501818,0.84103405,0.11893701,0.00026411095],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010464261,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0006673975,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08244543,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001960535,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0040611927,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4360183},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.050658047,0.06727281,0.57772595,0.0746003,0.0022927108,0.0001166513,0.0009805481,0.0004206004,0.22593233],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8116412,0.0378902,0.11906713,0.0031168547,0.002938504,0.00034162338,0.0003525218,0.00027304498,0.024378864],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99304706,0.004442104,0.00029826557,0.0006030773,0.0013498708,0.00025960658],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9668287,0.028163569,0.0016395842,0.0014282506,0.0016205396,0.00031940214],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008973793,0.0008941005,0.0012528063,0.0038714684,0.0015910933,0.009774304,0.0014876887,0.0022640668,0.0110198],"category_scores_gemma":[0.030894678,0.0005988294,0.00109838,0.0044975835,0.013037519,0.008488092,0.0024223514,0.007550713,0.0010644792],"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":[0.000008414759,0.0000107822425,0.0007984951,0.00011777112,0.000027155482,0.000021373471,0.00042512993,0.00430447,0.00006215911,0.98384017,0.0010712777,0.009312731],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000004319165,0.0000081857415,0.0008104299,0.00009727918,0.000006519972,0.000031172458,0.000323176,0.005796592,0.00009147209,0.98060685,0.012207508,0.000016410164],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010449203,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0075337742,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0110198,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006061287,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0040831706,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04745853},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.02419,0.2903289,0.017629126,0.50120616,0.0021851868,0.000107130436,0.000103288025,0.000029484454,0.1642208],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7142193,0.147237,0.0057676462,0.11520405,0.006781032,0.000271798,0.000058898615,0.000034998357,0.010425304],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.8890088,0.07751527,0.004715707,0.005201361,0.018912977,0.004645901],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.83322597,0.14669073,0.0071082846,0.0047847517,0.006886729,0.0013035217],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.067327194,0.0003378037,0.0012156345,0.002570725,0.00743847,0.0116846915,0.0025649886,0.015957594,0.0040120115],"category_scores_gemma":[0.13761804,0.00057097734,0.0011145873,0.0032303587,0.031774886,0.014149041,0.0049834824,0.0113604395,0.00060495094],"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":[0.000037141737,0.000026572397,0.0010787038,0.000537872,0.00003810497,0.00016920827,0.0027477029,0.00030609604,0.00007476945,0.9510282,0.010073955,0.03388167],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008723391,0.00023250819,0.007785317,0.008341513,0.00014001146,0.0006976393,0.0066939117,0.00096885255,0.0005826633,0.7147896,0.2595637,0.00011699143],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012787274,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.017737862,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.067327194,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008452038,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.018897993,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3560645},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.18981095,0.010419508,0.006450228,0.56426734,0.0021547035,0.000101119265,0.0004576191,0.00006368438,0.22627486],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.95081544,0.004011128,0.004498282,0.0255563,0.00053356535,0.00007161568,0.00009630366,0.000091127615,0.014326232],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9777206,0.008948005,0.00075725716,0.0022318359,0.0064867395,0.003855601],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9532808,0.02367069,0.0017182427,0.0020856531,0.01445622,0.004788416],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.046050623,0.00042657918,0.000874124,0.0026299362,0.026183477,0.013107997,0.0034370893,0.0041133463,0.008001594],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10712185,0.00054978987,0.0005536864,0.002818927,0.023772812,0.006006433,0.00687079,0.007443298,0.0005405559],"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":[0.00019457094,0.00006717166,0.0301269,0.00029873,0.00012088398,0.0010616038,0.14996523,0.0016416978,0.00044107472,0.5715256,0.1095809,0.1349756],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000058332313,0.000082782106,0.07394127,0.0023103983,0.00017031106,0.0005223381,0.2392526,0.003766591,0.00089093414,0.2772728,0.40128517,0.00044654126],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9358504,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9768794,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.069974355,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.069974355,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.14430152,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5077019},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.011928574,0.17774384,0.01153351,0.10899569,0.023597363,0.00031671664,0.001016859,0.0008114567,0.664056],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.16712551,0.105100304,0.023262814,0.025936509,0.007423961,0.00073370204,0.0010478733,0.0008589728,0.6685103],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9756639,0.0046027754,0.0013018232,0.0023407266,0.014210561,0.0018802348],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97576547,0.007965434,0.001367805,0.0021653473,0.010448581,0.0022873327],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.022684883,0.0013651118,0.0015034396,0.004405127,0.006999582,0.018283958,0.0019316053,0.008615177,0.02088561],"category_scores_gemma":[0.021104032,0.00074693497,0.0016090523,0.0033139798,0.0070242197,0.0038327966,0.0031514184,0.012462364,0.00695528],"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":[0.00013602262,0.000094689334,0.0015148387,0.00057903875,0.000074147996,0.00074541784,0.0024036637,0.0011822612,0.0032803249,0.72446126,0.15809195,0.10743641],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001542679,0.000018971981,0.0014685403,0.00034489628,0.0000061909363,0.00011381072,0.00018646142,0.00014957883,0.00057030725,0.0037311993,0.9933729,0.00002166999],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.36956483,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.19110689,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.63043517,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.033679523,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.089342825,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.73482746},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9891339,0.00023330557,0.00021480228,0.00042010366,0.000013081111,0.00020718673,0.005638258,0.000027142225,0.0041121957],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9866671,0.0013507112,0.0011678032,0.00068409403,0.000014723454,0.00024843958,0.0057633887,0.000019494215,0.004084258],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.997569,0.00030585256,0.00024188444,0.00023882781,0.0011765185,0.00046787426],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9922426,0.0011178931,0.0023442383,0.00033476047,0.0032685285,0.00069192937],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024064586,0.00021422347,0.00031027486,0.0021203877,0.0018941739,0.0010135319,0.000837177,0.00054045673,0.0028990929],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007692443,0.000570032,0.00026180764,0.0041309246,0.00064421096,0.0009161439,0.0007212455,0.00083785964,0.00081962],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000060001534,0.00013631104,0.9226866,0.0002405398,0.00002817434,0.00020219585,0.022575883,0.00007726453,0.00095602736,0.00015806823,0.009625082,0.04325387],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000023979817,0.00006151629,0.9710472,0.00008158489,0.0000041738745,0.00010457083,0.021894762,0.000085240754,0.00018415465,0.000013047907,0.006505759,0.00001551429],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.73105466,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8571141,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.73105466,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008337761,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.010393536,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5410584},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0003284454,0.9160443,0.00040861836,0.051621307,0.022272663,0.00007430353,0.00073857175,0.00002780521,0.008484062],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0043075355,0.92221916,0.00054551155,0.028297462,0.024511984,0.00015605791,0.0006545595,0.00006818576,0.01923947],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978683,0.00063777005,0.00017638777,0.00028487027,0.00093973265,0.00009283934],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9678159,0.025095545,0.0013583548,0.00031627496,0.0050158645,0.0003981258],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024193414,0.00076280837,0.0022106974,0.004317528,0.00065006706,0.0028003596,0.0014137957,0.0039073946,0.023875562],"category_scores_gemma":[0.019920152,0.0006044086,0.0006920175,0.008154092,0.0016667664,0.0016975406,0.001005948,0.003641147,0.006323116],"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":[0.000029757144,0.000019660321,0.00021315906,0.0037865266,0.00006568633,0.000023757297,0.000043503132,0.00009168994,0.00006543143,0.001576275,0.9088866,0.08519792],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005833295,0.00007675425,0.005146756,0.011322982,0.00019347447,0.00034876622,0.00016300654,0.00011255043,0.00011086225,0.0040763086,0.9783505,0.000039694198],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.013525709,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.032185297,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.023875562,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0027460337,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0055278777,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.079871714},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.024029316,0.09721476,0.12164921,0.47851467,0.019091958,0.0011821007,0.0019427703,0.00090066163,0.25547463],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.32855076,0.12407501,0.2550789,0.06295799,0.017220872,0.002150051,0.002266853,0.0011483125,0.20655128],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.8954162,0.041501444,0.009573808,0.004847672,0.04568146,0.002979412],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.68356603,0.18050711,0.009491812,0.017467836,0.104948394,0.0040188446],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.09249263,0.0009711986,0.0012617458,0.010850894,0.009176812,0.03111568,0.0036264549,0.0095475195,0.022302765],"category_scores_gemma":[0.15757777,0.0011172072,0.0019443672,0.009092707,0.012839168,0.010095809,0.0059015863,0.009368835,0.006161051],"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":[0.00022203864,0.00016557258,0.004222246,0.0033902747,0.00011959013,0.00048321113,0.010768559,0.002629783,0.0036272574,0.48211268,0.13648455,0.35577425],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000027300399,0.00012934304,0.0049005356,0.0069837314,0.00011074422,0.00037854028,0.004402682,0.002239269,0.0053726,0.060494404,0.91478264,0.00017820441],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08570384,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06961214,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09249263,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.027777769,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.07592115,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.48915362},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.039072637,0.0052397493,0.11552358,0.030236013,0.009197625,0.0006924269,0.0014524651,0.0017998425,0.79678565],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.30355552,0.004188378,0.04520297,0.0033349632,0.0018391352,0.0004893262,0.0013324983,0.0011748523,0.63888234],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99322224,0.0025957131,0.00047930426,0.0010473477,0.0020734598,0.0005819608],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98171747,0.005154209,0.0008742064,0.005139238,0.006359111,0.00075567025],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0056248805,0.0014138381,0.00060330756,0.0030502991,0.0046061995,0.013278254,0.0020597156,0.0025523494,0.09746432],"category_scores_gemma":[0.029812148,0.0005993624,0.0010351702,0.0024886406,0.005969246,0.00996611,0.0066317674,0.0040433165,0.033712447],"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":[0.00025676555,0.00013273717,0.0033786271,0.0005681015,0.000048659134,0.0015438211,0.019699775,0.0010544766,0.0022945725,0.6515612,0.067246124,0.2522152],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000030329345,0.000094877025,0.0021105257,0.000597606,0.00004427762,0.0009983081,0.009370838,0.0019995666,0.002746967,0.117353655,0.86459386,0.000059253904],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010604179,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007057718,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09746432,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003968012,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008457343,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.32605064},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99215215,0.0005125866,0.0010079419,0.0004257392,0.000012591226,0.00020110737,0.00020720961,0.0000020361285,0.005478682],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99834883,0.0002601604,0.0005177495,0.00015269002,0.000015729964,0.00009903659,0.000154456,0.0000029627013,0.0004484887],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9704037,0.014905085,0.0027269511,0.0018596952,0.008181879,0.0019227049],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6275411,0.2922355,0.04533647,0.011174866,0.019869758,0.003842333],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.034703504,0.0002782086,0.00051835907,0.0039346744,0.0031027426,0.0027777944,0.0016103887,0.0014707723,0.003001956],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2347476,0.00029258235,0.00040877642,0.0036512532,0.0028492932,0.003788649,0.0041974597,0.0018241135,0.0003960491],"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":[0.00045492084,0.0005074784,0.87091255,0.00035646604,0.00023471571,0.0012597477,0.07741443,0.0010688322,0.00043545326,0.008756428,0.0034963319,0.035102524],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000087978995,0.00038990233,0.8213805,0.00071754714,0.00015008323,0.0014576723,0.14778368,0.004833198,0.0010650288,0.006753263,0.015280238,0.00010085918],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.017009243,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.025551366,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.034703504,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0029037693,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0039360053,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.18353188},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.10172771,0.010473259,0.010917439,0.53900176,0.007087598,0.0010328108,0.0005486414,0.0005564809,0.3286542],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5339179,0.0028134233,0.008962519,0.3519848,0.0025527545,0.0013517566,0.00030765662,0.00012890737,0.097980395],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.92676216,0.016976101,0.0068088863,0.0088793095,0.024769055,0.015804486],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94024473,0.03288286,0.004629355,0.005180475,0.011972522,0.0050899745],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.05084715,0.0005906083,0.0010569441,0.0028495898,0.017554944,0.014252441,0.006111139,0.027538853,0.0045821434],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10644511,0.0015352733,0.0015601506,0.002097152,0.013039273,0.0040853373,0.0073699304,0.021615509,0.0017385579],"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":[0.00011459364,0.00011872034,0.004214306,0.00015973969,0.000045349574,0.0006227538,0.004706732,0.00096090185,0.0008931088,0.81137496,0.14217201,0.034616813],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00035846027,0.0006559402,0.04098692,0.0017252674,0.0002347701,0.00070694514,0.007194406,0.0023764898,0.0033166227,0.13932182,0.8024369,0.00068542216],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.19108793,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.3102768,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.80891204,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.028236179,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.06492418,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.37995136},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9911664,0.00014527257,0.00008350612,0.00051597704,0.000029385032,0.00007267963,0.00007461201,0.0000037664488,0.007908449],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9973809,0.00011912974,0.000119852106,0.00013030956,0.000010596907,0.000030636627,0.00007905334,0.0000038759044,0.0021255824],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99440235,0.00080971676,0.0001723168,0.00047934116,0.0029810125,0.0011553196],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99056846,0.0015613288,0.002269585,0.00035484473,0.002659017,0.0025867296],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0037153966,0.00031794922,0.00048763884,0.0019976764,0.011170986,0.0026057914,0.0013374602,0.0008183573,0.0074897422],"category_scores_gemma":[0.022837589,0.00027435916,0.0004981129,0.0012513018,0.0032400154,0.0007501617,0.0025928076,0.0011618963,0.0005061062],"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":[0.0012701593,0.0006010603,0.90732145,0.00007801722,0.00017296452,0.00049915956,0.042027425,0.0002854293,0.0027176724,0.0023225674,0.00390802,0.038796216],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026141033,0.000092374554,0.97831887,0.000042720018,0.000032507673,0.00005283656,0.01838308,0.00026064526,0.00024256886,0.000313436,0.0021997555,0.00003499405],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.88605887,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9572829,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.11394113,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.019315455,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02361749,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.22922426},"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":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.03911687,0.44638187,0.008691214,0.36545303,0.0064342087,0.00011535146,0.00021292028,0.000084672836,0.13350981],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.77054477,0.14883006,0.005661449,0.039668497,0.009983216,0.00023072652,0.00013748303,0.000058720376,0.024885101],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9938305,0.0030853061,0.000521057,0.0010689509,0.0009328985,0.0005613329],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9946837,0.0030213313,0.000575624,0.0003490577,0.0010704211,0.00030005377],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00883654,0.00025332393,0.000745203,0.0022494807,0.0066883797,0.010232425,0.0013622286,0.0050207376,0.0029189417],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0139735965,0.0004215546,0.000384106,0.0031454964,0.01291505,0.0069637722,0.0035230636,0.0065262513,0.00045378009],"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":[0.000010836802,0.000014961361,0.00064722187,0.00033071314,0.0000068575955,0.0000816955,0.0021528073,0.00032293546,0.00006424939,0.9624166,0.0075829434,0.0263683],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000016019963,0.00006712534,0.0067286114,0.0025335748,0.000021724574,0.00022003822,0.0062348614,0.00083042897,0.00024086305,0.35832068,0.624738,0.00004808458],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.017463222,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011934022,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.017463222,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.014860018,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01583502,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10781747},"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":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.012370907,0.83991545,0.0014732582,0.10757657,0.0016757073,0.00017872147,0.00041693353,0.000016402086,0.036376018],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.27831674,0.6682111,0.006300694,0.032598805,0.0020994032,0.000873003,0.00047546887,0.000041247255,0.011083496],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9682588,0.022216773,0.0022606952,0.0010200145,0.0050420356,0.0012016956],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.91102135,0.05672826,0.006885037,0.0020824953,0.021155542,0.002127335],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.059487425,0.00020058833,0.0011540904,0.0017686934,0.0028137283,0.0066511338,0.002294472,0.0024011529,0.0037359186],"category_scores_gemma":[0.111545034,0.0004170078,0.0005214966,0.003072941,0.0035566082,0.0034700208,0.0024878357,0.0031573754,0.00057260605],"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":[0.00029689865,0.000060847276,0.00820584,0.01413183,0.00033798092,0.00020542557,0.0069148354,0.00094007276,0.00016241729,0.16126496,0.09523584,0.712243],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00017798433,0.00023130154,0.04590198,0.08492414,0.00049010135,0.0002782175,0.021099469,0.0005052946,0.000720573,0.03697451,0.80857825,0.00011809942],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.28218257,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5133844,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7178174,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.015108701,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.069242224,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5610802},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9688306,0.0004788282,0.00050353154,0.002371164,0.00003650413,0.00013594968,0.00012807944,0.000019273915,0.027496077],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99750817,0.00022878259,0.0003269312,0.00021516932,0.000008541601,0.000032905584,0.000059305115,0.000007604328,0.001612527],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.98952836,0.0035497027,0.00048125893,0.0009491701,0.0037305816,0.0017608539],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.975977,0.011068473,0.0032771337,0.00079912296,0.005522503,0.003355903],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01210607,0.00043919374,0.00051054225,0.0029916395,0.0109793395,0.0072107543,0.002281092,0.0016249579,0.010165886],"category_scores_gemma":[0.080153815,0.0004846324,0.0004899848,0.0019151561,0.005370612,0.0026850277,0.0042399256,0.0018638258,0.00044318975],"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":[0.0013452172,0.0007018294,0.2602279,0.00049788516,0.00015423559,0.0017303028,0.60569984,0.0017951878,0.0029265296,0.030823443,0.011759591,0.08233814],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00018513325,0.00042492134,0.62410337,0.0008466771,0.00017286542,0.00034719074,0.32765958,0.0040732035,0.0009177692,0.010192453,0.03064403,0.0004328635],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9082973,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9413267,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0917027,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.06459653,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.052480686,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.46868283},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99261475,0.00020217613,0.00005618888,0.0019726593,0.000016196756,0.000028406599,0.000036999863,0.000001689857,0.0050708116],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99775213,0.00025448253,0.000106982945,0.0002783357,0.0000061446945,0.000007013065,0.000029119374,0.0000011724625,0.001564664],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978992,0.00036182528,0.00006283888,0.00012973268,0.0009442063,0.000602316],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99513775,0.00088118657,0.001294393,0.00009872944,0.0011234389,0.0014645476],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0017373452,0.00019085284,0.00020565651,0.00083162327,0.00985081,0.002223331,0.0008872333,0.00071241375,0.004463983],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012946368,0.00021688064,0.00022351736,0.00070495234,0.0032649485,0.0006517799,0.0016665561,0.0018788127,0.00021602768],"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":[0.0002695305,0.00072787673,0.76907754,0.00013118392,0.000054286058,0.0005712124,0.11763936,0.00033356008,0.0013427973,0.0036147968,0.007910996,0.09832695],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000018348721,0.00007955891,0.8863463,0.00016203047,0.000026339583,0.00013543692,0.1024007,0.00035384682,0.00033451468,0.0006415339,0.009449771,0.000051684434],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.96136296,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9875174,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.041525368,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.041525368,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.056093466,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.30128902},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.20477007,0.006862307,0.21005031,0.44629964,0.0016034379,0.00010144947,0.00022587368,0.00019666099,0.12989028],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97958755,0.00068181026,0.012369365,0.0044054226,0.0004985736,0.000040025177,0.000014669567,0.00002923095,0.0023733082],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98361003,0.01046567,0.0007881969,0.0014947917,0.0031415583,0.00049983134],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8806553,0.10093421,0.0061711255,0.005303648,0.005677736,0.0012579518],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03358655,0.00032389193,0.0011778094,0.0015044708,0.0018032368,0.005253521,0.0015871843,0.0036310889,0.0034736157],"category_scores_gemma":[0.09070398,0.00039890365,0.0006352654,0.0010104616,0.02376437,0.0096168015,0.0037736527,0.006568959,0.00040333904],"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":[0.000027933595,0.000014718524,0.00027486877,0.000027042659,0.000014843048,0.00007340022,0.0002735654,0.0006945083,0.000093472576,0.99354184,0.0016477105,0.0033160597],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000013215666,0.0000045704537,0.00010180259,0.0000139926315,0.0000038295266,0.000018770355,0.000053142492,0.0013550606,0.00007836391,0.99712354,0.0012273883,0.000006375989],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0011079838,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00075012416,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03358655,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0028769744,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0023386902,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17762476},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"methods","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":"methods","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.025054768,0.04932276,0.31583613,0.3873148,0.023220263,0.003944835,0.00057291816,0.0016278753,0.19310571],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.442621,0.019604193,0.21111624,0.26356876,0.013825937,0.010278765,0.00046580686,0.0013044702,0.037214775],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.6565444,0.25424165,0.01860694,0.016981142,0.0470932,0.0065326686],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.33561614,0.5448665,0.03259411,0.047429148,0.032023944,0.0074702105],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":["metaresearch"],"category_scores_codex":[0.29585466,0.0013759499,0.003640173,0.0033571639,0.0064859334,0.013498701,0.0054728943,0.01639291,0.00902729],"category_scores_gemma":[0.61409914,0.0017101788,0.0018932159,0.002342799,0.021703351,0.013909841,0.011192787,0.028192034,0.0047055646],"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":[0.0009982089,0.00011396018,0.0033079935,0.0019026143,0.0006284821,0.0007181404,0.012763254,0.0025587913,0.0010494585,0.625045,0.12648551,0.22442865],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00088276796,0.00039035577,0.0016561564,0.0070663546,0.00032604282,0.00036991568,0.0015255859,0.0028801237,0.0019706073,0.63248926,0.35026032,0.00018248489],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0060879984,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007153256,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7041453,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006294279,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.027471315,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.86833656},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9926427,0.000096868665,0.00010802534,0.00029745625,0.000022663542,0.00005074198,0.00037883504,0.000017937196,0.0063847327],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99512595,0.00011521554,0.00028093677,0.00018981127,0.0000093920335,0.00006317109,0.0005542286,0.00000780304,0.0036534986],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99598724,0.00072980876,0.00044077137,0.00038784847,0.001914987,0.0005393459],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95428467,0.018499302,0.008340955,0.0024105322,0.013150452,0.003313973],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0048109055,0.00024386097,0.00040429665,0.0013896961,0.0023698164,0.002820371,0.0007689371,0.0016805154,0.007590814],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08054252,0.00032079333,0.0004940467,0.00054646475,0.0014117003,0.0011172093,0.0014841246,0.0014221964,0.0011834212],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0015834839,0.0008499645,0.8727409,0.00027810334,0.0002920664,0.00034489366,0.05985169,0.0011227882,0.0054626367,0.0013177189,0.018702699,0.03745294],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005104793,0.0002467346,0.9808942,0.00012546661,0.000058360867,0.00011436107,0.012225616,0.00068660703,0.0011140927,0.00026902257,0.004097742,0.000116912066],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.280949,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.45992848,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.719051,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0043971995,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0075380243,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.55862737},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.18159375,0.012675433,0.007931895,0.28887534,0.0022567804,0.000082704595,0.0003259048,0.00010170422,0.5061565],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9044586,0.0031062118,0.0009801988,0.011181786,0.0006180804,0.000055118067,0.0000645579,0.00006524256,0.07947016],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9945675,0.0018860049,0.00011814778,0.0008387986,0.0010322722,0.0015571842],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9944807,0.0016564357,0.0008287294,0.0003437746,0.0011967906,0.001493585],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006236963,0.00027873457,0.00045600088,0.001073806,0.008951206,0.010370119,0.0016156974,0.004118373,0.0188435],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01856017,0.00032872337,0.00030361244,0.0011820783,0.014015989,0.0061185635,0.0044454937,0.0060090385,0.0022888286],"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":[0.00004822632,0.00003394984,0.0051177763,0.00007027631,0.00001516665,0.00016407907,0.013707967,0.00012151461,0.00023625244,0.9248014,0.025472784,0.030210726],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000051579424,0.00017953661,0.045211107,0.0013690604,0.00006125401,0.00026427384,0.045732096,0.00066635944,0.0009272197,0.23271684,0.672647,0.0001735945],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07339815,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.14693096,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07339815,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.010005595,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.019499678,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14594185},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9984877,0.000018711546,0.00008208808,0.000011716178,0.0000012564142,0.000007534151,0.0000117311265,7.4984854e-7,0.0013784885],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9994703,0.000015787497,0.00012517539,0.00001049549,0.0000013018116,0.000007686563,0.0000295947,0.0000020430705,0.00033762903],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99871683,0.00050967856,0.00010980447,0.0002423529,0.00021319491,0.00020817165],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99164,0.0051199524,0.0011291467,0.00076286553,0.0010110714,0.00033698633],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0027061624,0.00026707508,0.00034207047,0.0011035316,0.001844452,0.0017606894,0.00030757033,0.00025276182,0.0018979838],"category_scores_gemma":[0.010182962,0.00023408113,0.0002505687,0.001184848,0.0030616655,0.0010368619,0.0016543769,0.00060593453,0.0001431935],"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":[0.00058087247,0.00014587994,0.32186595,0.000147045,0.00012855738,0.0018623566,0.63763434,0.00035760822,0.016371086,0.003529566,0.00036077062,0.017015891],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000024042987,0.00014719774,0.83906287,0.000038687962,0.00006133652,0.00028637203,0.15321004,0.0011850445,0.0025167225,0.00088155095,0.0025389942,0.000047087175],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06687126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.11425727,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06687126,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0019315511,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013351917,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.13296402},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99807066,0.000042079464,0.00036546984,0.00006516842,0.00000493794,0.000026060196,0.000011437888,0.0000034093775,0.0014107403],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99918216,0.0000329368,0.0004252592,0.000032825166,0.000010187097,0.00003071274,0.000022548062,0.0000024645537,0.00026071572],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99192977,0.0053544664,0.0005130918,0.00050098816,0.0012113714,0.0004904188],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9269487,0.05217481,0.015010067,0.0015041792,0.001603215,0.0027589155],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009196948,0.00025897496,0.000397351,0.00066040026,0.00074199116,0.0027622734,0.00032180204,0.0007046739,0.003263347],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07280732,0.00020258382,0.0002834263,0.00026364622,0.00076641876,0.0008403306,0.0013184224,0.001332664,0.0004261634],"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":[0.00799417,0.0044340556,0.82861906,0.00030129022,0.00044042905,0.0006420574,0.029859778,0.0017288356,0.022893706,0.002398426,0.00074062595,0.09994767],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00016815851,0.0026284696,0.9761905,0.0001004084,0.000092594106,0.00029186156,0.009670665,0.0035872553,0.0023108188,0.0034961137,0.0013845535,0.00007863428],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005786656,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0010011728,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009196948,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000389374,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006249231,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0486387},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.78873104,0.037251763,0.008241648,0.06614897,0.000268869,0.00012988209,0.000041893454,0.000020038131,0.09916586],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9872924,0.0079186335,0.0013531077,0.0018403246,0.0001749529,0.000023104127,0.000015765145,0.000005244387,0.0013763711],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9809248,0.012765242,0.0013200381,0.00083835423,0.002321397,0.0018300804],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.924096,0.06611421,0.006111041,0.0010432617,0.0015615504,0.0010739684],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.018445207,0.00029826144,0.00048492718,0.0048803226,0.0054574395,0.005575982,0.0011439404,0.0055351937,0.003141105],"category_scores_gemma":[0.09118548,0.00038190724,0.0004575337,0.0022510868,0.01657101,0.010905058,0.010617316,0.003677415,0.00025397495],"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":[0.0001787905,0.000086610016,0.041802425,0.0009263865,0.00005439454,0.06077692,0.5847193,0.00073456904,0.001211002,0.18269801,0.002984338,0.12382729],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000023758756,0.00021023564,0.034113314,0.0063201226,0.000080699945,0.06649935,0.6516923,0.001397456,0.0015569,0.15530068,0.082677424,0.000127721],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0039677313,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0065513607,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.018445207,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003468328,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004233806,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09754872},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99923015,0.000063217296,0.00008028564,0.000036499296,0.000003297322,0.0000086050295,0.0000063886428,0.0000012591025,0.00057016127],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99956685,0.000060539598,0.00010693382,0.00003162776,0.0000060114003,0.000011202321,0.000015815349,0.0000013379365,0.00019974477],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9973706,0.0014247684,0.00025151725,0.00017289924,0.00058683427,0.0001933344],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9765022,0.01016492,0.009483131,0.00086227135,0.0017175687,0.0012698335],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0036434466,0.00022881408,0.00034675357,0.00061198825,0.0012579293,0.0020767308,0.00017189445,0.00061372307,0.0028067466],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03311298,0.00020647128,0.00035420735,0.00026218456,0.001102565,0.0010007428,0.0012958847,0.00074482174,0.00025733648],"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":[0.0023761836,0.0007494445,0.839,0.00029119357,0.00023846784,0.0008516775,0.08876458,0.00032137684,0.032810982,0.00053348974,0.00072888983,0.033333715],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000016697852,0.00047795146,0.9655406,0.00007380667,0.00004349202,0.00025359105,0.030705081,0.00027470823,0.0018638998,0.00021989277,0.00049451884,0.00003592935],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003918952,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0072162,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.003918952,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00061764783,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006366307,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.019268632},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5930584,0.0015165007,0.30267385,0.019334204,0.00031121544,0.0008949965,0.00010653905,0.000079616344,0.08202459],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9579229,0.00028200808,0.039410908,0.0010679732,0.000067656256,0.00041424448,0.000025961117,0.000022773498,0.0007856576],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9270902,0.060007196,0.0017683685,0.003128677,0.0061991364,0.0018063318],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.80248994,0.16133624,0.020806111,0.0064500286,0.0067234556,0.0021942009],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.059157997,0.0006013741,0.0007415493,0.0034708588,0.0037295371,0.007565775,0.0024916476,0.0027119622,0.0048529757],"category_scores_gemma":[0.17136703,0.00073731755,0.0011465711,0.0017668584,0.011987178,0.005712634,0.0042098113,0.004861905,0.0003083169],"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":[0.00039586847,0.0011810866,0.08122311,0.00085336843,0.0004136928,0.0004219628,0.098104954,0.0058817742,0.0013857111,0.7045752,0.0017959169,0.10376741],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002189571,0.0006565171,0.092433356,0.0013266134,0.00021485439,0.0003105879,0.042004727,0.035855707,0.0013261233,0.8119119,0.013479768,0.00026090452],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0038155778,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005238295,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.059157997,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0040706675,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0074976715,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.31286114},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.23983441,0.26935312,0.035981905,0.28350428,0.003284903,0.00046119667,0.00024355957,0.00043421527,0.16690245],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.93508714,0.034201287,0.0076906392,0.01065589,0.0015075845,0.00022264989,0.00009168853,0.0000527817,0.010490376],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9722271,0.0125429565,0.003689232,0.0025267224,0.006187511,0.0028264856],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9770846,0.01024595,0.004517051,0.0014737496,0.005693492,0.0009852593],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.023196515,0.00021118346,0.00095233193,0.002303117,0.004581917,0.014351854,0.0029952403,0.0059693814,0.0018931177],"category_scores_gemma":[0.041641228,0.00042631634,0.00063687796,0.0021634798,0.008811409,0.0046309596,0.0034263069,0.0032503726,0.0004789999],"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":[0.00014276223,0.00015331789,0.008258552,0.0016467937,0.000077696015,0.00055310887,0.007501555,0.006824986,0.0007519537,0.7792392,0.011673619,0.18317652],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011573397,0.000612092,0.06465363,0.0049712164,0.00024763405,0.0010482665,0.024727363,0.009275315,0.0038671924,0.29759818,0.5925699,0.00031353039],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012658893,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007008957,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.023196515,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.013201964,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.022835437,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.12267637},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99966383,0.00003209896,0.000034753917,0.000011440892,0.0000015330169,0.0000058836026,0.000010898969,5.878574e-7,0.00023889971],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.999741,0.000028221206,0.000048413975,0.0000075238067,0.0000035514163,0.0000071065897,0.000018634782,7.059787e-7,0.00014474806],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9990038,0.00040988254,0.00012825344,0.00012530277,0.00020239424,0.00013040527],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9834404,0.008983351,0.00527337,0.0005268001,0.0007756757,0.0010004148],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014981049,0.00016624521,0.00021087963,0.00042057724,0.00044948448,0.00080783415,0.000180677,0.0004000064,0.003996996],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01932148,0.00013859766,0.00018089816,0.00023676232,0.0004461014,0.0004986713,0.0005095354,0.0003880121,0.00032934887],"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":[0.0015312725,0.00048609008,0.96426934,0.00006469872,0.000074692376,0.0005514003,0.011786338,0.00010491107,0.006190049,0.00006809333,0.00017708784,0.014695941],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000010029612,0.0003013803,0.99465865,0.000012378707,0.000014395708,0.00019010754,0.004078642,0.00012430054,0.0004377693,0.0000384577,0.00012685239,0.0000069573007],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0026398166,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005534934,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.003996996,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00032391632,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003697669,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.013371289},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.005112122,0.16686827,0.010855299,0.77609533,0.0028695923,0.00009753111,0.00034515263,0.00012570026,0.037630953],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.36801717,0.32495973,0.09677616,0.16343582,0.008540586,0.00032369464,0.0009157426,0.00042527763,0.036605902],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.91053283,0.022746174,0.0036636821,0.0060931216,0.048409592,0.008554544],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6569667,0.20260476,0.008704443,0.015820209,0.10266802,0.0132359015],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.11493675,0.0008720376,0.0022998727,0.007719662,0.011766349,0.02831056,0.006356013,0.015002631,0.013416858],"category_scores_gemma":[0.26569703,0.0013354269,0.0016031852,0.007837425,0.03332994,0.025153784,0.0105896015,0.018614795,0.001912187],"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":[0.000078918514,0.00005726586,0.0018104252,0.002151817,0.00011475985,0.0004800934,0.008804706,0.0010460943,0.00040414312,0.5669227,0.1697736,0.24835539],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000029711588,0.00005322031,0.0040950663,0.0051779402,0.000057906615,0.00023114121,0.006418328,0.0010981761,0.00036251743,0.21940388,0.7629248,0.00014735252],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6758601,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6807675,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6758601,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.06742727,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.2117855,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6520976},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.009024901,0.020616539,0.025420193,0.49051592,0.00618186,0.00010481446,0.0004825826,0.00026796572,0.44738522],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.4967822,0.020665785,0.028893678,0.2660355,0.011181548,0.00032513004,0.0008349449,0.0006922745,0.17458892],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9837487,0.0063768975,0.00097184116,0.0034177373,0.0041061197,0.0013786483],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9553294,0.019449292,0.0036675774,0.011325034,0.0056217443,0.004607004],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.026421327,0.0008725276,0.0014478437,0.004200103,0.0041387095,0.019472346,0.002465641,0.010559707,0.06886898],"category_scores_gemma":[0.059721433,0.00059501646,0.0009030703,0.0022378094,0.0334034,0.045881215,0.014347041,0.012623296,0.012213453],"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":[0.00006267296,0.000057213576,0.000799167,0.00042338658,0.000040174393,0.00018833447,0.0021453784,0.00018469527,0.00018443845,0.9064932,0.042741265,0.046680123],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003751993,0.000049816164,0.0005601196,0.00084950816,0.000028073538,0.0002572418,0.0017440652,0.00014356068,0.00028118942,0.55717295,0.43883908,0.000036787285],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0038391247,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0046946607,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06886898,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0067353426,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.011262313,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23038971},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8150778,0.00561999,0.0068156538,0.06455389,0.00078419456,0.002237044,0.00035438177,0.000043079646,0.104514025],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98898727,0.000830667,0.003932197,0.003485289,0.000060780287,0.00044726863,0.000034504243,0.000017626187,0.0022042992],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.632279,0.24939921,0.012145366,0.005876513,0.08145115,0.01884881],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.18702643,0.755136,0.018198125,0.010145603,0.024636287,0.0048575583],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.3516897,0.0007021938,0.0014466288,0.0053828596,0.021801693,0.00936899,0.004382307,0.005807136,0.004767003],"category_scores_gemma":[0.74877006,0.0013601435,0.0017321975,0.0046348167,0.027568525,0.0076517044,0.009447131,0.010047065,0.00034425338],"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":[0.00986019,0.0012487044,0.20258826,0.0020219232,0.0008440744,0.0015198427,0.11465144,0.0049939672,0.0017475558,0.41187254,0.015937751,0.23271373],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0017789114,0.004862179,0.5263433,0.0043899785,0.003126586,0.0011793503,0.10527046,0.022159845,0.008405849,0.24638943,0.07457354,0.0015206239],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.57646257,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7609323,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.42353743,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.07714843,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.16123588,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8520635},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.17607814,0.023087384,0.097523145,0.36271912,0.0021989662,0.0007038822,0.0001619332,0.00040854374,0.33711895],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9647433,0.0019838342,0.01201255,0.010562368,0.00082240626,0.00018927378,0.000031423242,0.000048751215,0.009606168],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.92456615,0.0364088,0.0035326306,0.008126247,0.017908912,0.009457255],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8305258,0.09036298,0.023822883,0.029071424,0.019123645,0.007093234],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.07523925,0.00039291673,0.0010778444,0.0033870752,0.005578994,0.019407947,0.002808088,0.006030823,0.0033598598],"category_scores_gemma":[0.16029155,0.00058306364,0.00069043325,0.0034631551,0.040519647,0.019879516,0.009086433,0.007065304,0.0006386948],"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":[0.000029221961,0.000041053023,0.0050678374,0.00011927866,0.000030346968,0.00010378409,0.0057803653,0.0007661808,0.0001321883,0.93383217,0.0046429904,0.049454525],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011665939,0.00013571627,0.011246475,0.00090073096,0.00009308013,0.00024198012,0.010219588,0.002533683,0.0011732571,0.8524459,0.120752916,0.0001400268],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009732735,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009374054,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07523925,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012476351,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.025958974,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3979079},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99283457,0.00008639297,0.0024093883,0.00038107607,0.000023162096,0.00064261776,0.000033399763,0.000061387764,0.0035280737],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9923429,0.000051366518,0.0061491104,0.00030084787,0.000030212113,0.00041110913,0.000034872428,0.000017853166,0.0006617767],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.94489706,0.04060377,0.0027726006,0.0033174853,0.0071389754,0.0012701136],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.5128094,0.4034423,0.042986523,0.011857456,0.025025675,0.0038785813],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03412521,0.00035508673,0.00052215165,0.00091939286,0.0016357175,0.002398598,0.0009826795,0.0009987858,0.002978364],"category_scores_gemma":[0.22521336,0.0004996477,0.00044098424,0.0003964977,0.0013975957,0.0015670042,0.00142778,0.0012525397,0.0005281961],"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":[0.015299989,0.007842292,0.30778113,0.0022150858,0.00045937535,0.0014749434,0.18589582,0.0014120254,0.11587462,0.0035957664,0.0046556317,0.35349342],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0015531228,0.02836053,0.8348648,0.00076928356,0.0008365036,0.001281836,0.04528199,0.014313627,0.05062859,0.0045265704,0.016925285,0.0006578757],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015701221,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003024329,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03412521,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0015094832,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002002624,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1804735},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.078968756,0.015831258,0.20839447,0.3889491,0.0027438162,0.0007060661,0.0002921862,0.00013724575,0.3039772],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.89658374,0.005161495,0.057292216,0.030153787,0.0010936523,0.00039519943,0.00012259427,0.000095912095,0.009101414],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.85802025,0.06478756,0.005794984,0.008738769,0.05563269,0.0070258267],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.76379997,0.18946105,0.011095008,0.008777652,0.023252187,0.0036142233],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.104793124,0.0008768849,0.0018377439,0.012523391,0.01861975,0.028551938,0.006310877,0.011527683,0.004990704],"category_scores_gemma":[0.24823695,0.0012955836,0.0009616791,0.0063846107,0.075558715,0.021440772,0.015609506,0.015148297,0.0009101021],"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":[0.000030534775,0.00002317102,0.0022836113,0.00019793885,0.000028291264,0.0003006526,0.013313741,0.00035198792,0.000112677335,0.95757806,0.0037375148,0.02204187],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006604635,0.00005701663,0.0059565534,0.001881846,0.000058701728,0.000181361,0.02016379,0.0029687162,0.0005741734,0.88787663,0.08010341,0.00011175735],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.21665557,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.23881054,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.21665557,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.034427933,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.057559162,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.55420566},"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":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.04953013,0.06800252,0.0028409334,0.82943255,0.0049745655,0.0000515622,0.00009285819,0.000031394273,0.045043435],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7834118,0.02474644,0.0019423881,0.14195931,0.0033209785,0.000055964523,0.000065890774,0.000085399864,0.04441198],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.971817,0.009635216,0.0010169058,0.002938772,0.010238876,0.0043531945],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94725573,0.0305279,0.0024423683,0.0019066131,0.014894714,0.002972675],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.032312784,0.0002918588,0.0008376278,0.0015398851,0.022304298,0.013322948,0.0021673,0.007789977,0.0023308261],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07488594,0.0003962608,0.00076502975,0.0014541806,0.031013438,0.0074027446,0.0059704855,0.019434748,0.00033171254],"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":[0.0001548412,0.00003849776,0.011524279,0.0004538767,0.00009664648,0.0020386388,0.0983272,0.0005364927,0.0005144233,0.5778169,0.18708433,0.121413976],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000023067354,0.000079768724,0.012328687,0.0015665201,0.00008321431,0.00046580343,0.07422546,0.0003370781,0.0008119605,0.10537456,0.804542,0.00016194946],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5509191,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.72313106,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.44908088,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.036958676,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0716256,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9034512},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.030266196,0.0018515183,0.4706187,0.1264274,0.0010432639,0.00027347112,0.0001337961,0.00014860414,0.36923707],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8916845,0.00076993153,0.08188286,0.01121519,0.00077771826,0.00044509492,0.00007366446,0.00010034927,0.013050689],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.95246243,0.021387046,0.0019664883,0.005775808,0.015955716,0.0024525304],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96255744,0.022801276,0.002592561,0.0047681956,0.006161154,0.0011194226],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.046555106,0.0005833002,0.0015593612,0.0024135583,0.0059588314,0.011702276,0.0041894093,0.007187507,0.004441121],"category_scores_gemma":[0.052113336,0.0007326342,0.0013925749,0.0012382582,0.07355548,0.011706142,0.00976339,0.014664344,0.00090017606],"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":[0.0000035028124,0.0000063207635,0.000057825826,0.0000149700045,0.0000050978165,0.0000145344775,0.00085179944,0.00020534513,0.000038066264,0.99689084,0.00040924954,0.0015024497],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000013256121,0.000006517158,0.00010268601,0.000030527845,0.0000033386054,0.000019733488,0.00024478298,0.000490996,0.00006428955,0.9940586,0.0049555227,0.00000973328],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010333623,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.010235662,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.046555106,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009116467,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.016651971,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24620986},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.027230112,0.010030863,0.02323086,0.04991866,0.0031784063,0.00047477477,0.001598354,0.0002760282,0.88406193],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.39873675,0.0062832576,0.018427575,0.008541352,0.0011353149,0.00037534413,0.0010689374,0.00029163808,0.5651399],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99051976,0.002188461,0.0004465637,0.0016705855,0.004072336,0.0011022821],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99211955,0.002257895,0.0004837369,0.0006913844,0.0034261004,0.0010213703],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008085786,0.00044419363,0.00070832716,0.0021387138,0.008696988,0.011114385,0.0018474516,0.0036365206,0.05813859],"category_scores_gemma":[0.030939823,0.00047483275,0.00068778987,0.0014419936,0.004932356,0.004289882,0.0044319364,0.004475504,0.010380205],"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":[0.000104921564,0.000026593525,0.00278424,0.00017597651,0.000029337978,0.0003170152,0.0051886155,0.0007716911,0.0006779257,0.768594,0.11307311,0.108256586],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002166219,0.000053480795,0.004259545,0.0004307082,0.00001934168,0.00023794586,0.0033765498,0.0005486389,0.00067266973,0.08670455,0.9036199,0.000054950862],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.051606033,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.060029812,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05813859,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011674173,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.026348522,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.09353515,0.018338501,0.014560366,0.5595998,0.0022212644,0.00019766134,0.00034109963,0.00010353218,0.31110263],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.86046255,0.0049479157,0.0019438764,0.117116086,0.0017116696,0.00016333067,0.00013886383,0.000045660432,0.013470098],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.97091514,0.010510075,0.002994166,0.0025848383,0.008336763,0.004658996],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94418013,0.03379467,0.009809705,0.003056511,0.00701925,0.0021396328],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.032060623,0.00038338752,0.0010410239,0.002617041,0.0059977137,0.013046063,0.0024961627,0.01838809,0.010477378],"category_scores_gemma":[0.18744925,0.0009316808,0.0008190348,0.001493906,0.018057616,0.018332694,0.006288826,0.014210391,0.002277868],"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":[0.00017210987,0.00007475032,0.0082911765,0.0003278087,0.000050813178,0.00050989754,0.031420726,0.00034531596,0.00028711188,0.86805236,0.044436026,0.046031967],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00015884204,0.00015459648,0.021795455,0.0013431401,0.000052051393,0.000456542,0.015188786,0.00070362457,0.00037648864,0.78582156,0.17374082,0.0002081458],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.035635028,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03362705,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.035635028,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0064538056,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.013367942,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16955483},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.37637538,0.0238701,0.12485302,0.1746862,0.0049173543,0.0007201295,0.0008375897,0.00019537448,0.2935449],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97679263,0.0014184339,0.009624033,0.0063085924,0.00075028,0.00017547706,0.000078514124,0.000020482259,0.0048315804],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.89568645,0.061761133,0.008597256,0.0079545975,0.022336034,0.0036644596],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.54134387,0.37601689,0.030818215,0.019914536,0.029331043,0.0025754126],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08600392,0.0003482822,0.0013487661,0.0044622584,0.003088266,0.0071032457,0.0033507356,0.007693626,0.005368704],"category_scores_gemma":[0.41851267,0.000886883,0.0012299012,0.0015572187,0.010436016,0.007883234,0.0033311427,0.0056081377,0.0004217475],"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":[0.00042282682,0.00013368762,0.03250562,0.0006273709,0.0005586011,0.0016313698,0.0032383339,0.0032772564,0.00047447396,0.84288895,0.021579104,0.09266248],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013595358,0.00016684394,0.024640014,0.00083404116,0.0003134398,0.00093888934,0.0018740164,0.013715279,0.0011990318,0.92739993,0.028636666,0.00014578168],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0050424733,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008365729,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08600392,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0036117756,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007426348,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.45483762},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9974214,0.00021473735,0.0002411455,0.00018436287,0.000018513801,0.000015787155,0.00004513101,0.000002408704,0.0018563793],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9995384,0.00008469544,0.00018313224,0.000030999854,0.000009243401,0.0000068105755,0.000032077518,0.0000032162693,0.00011137231],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9969496,0.0017806315,0.00025195014,0.00021480348,0.00058489735,0.00021819716],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94646335,0.037550114,0.0102055445,0.0011933414,0.0024592986,0.0021283657],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0039333254,0.00015038303,0.00020819313,0.0006864939,0.00062236574,0.001751918,0.00025781043,0.00058700924,0.0037512665],"category_scores_gemma":[0.070189774,0.00020775589,0.00022645466,0.00034818193,0.0006332651,0.00078560825,0.0008795112,0.00078176125,0.00023546853],"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":[0.002536051,0.00055293663,0.9363912,0.00015837271,0.00040006192,0.0005007809,0.012368469,0.00040289407,0.0072757923,0.00088544947,0.0011902197,0.037337773],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000030970998,0.00024271203,0.9890949,0.00006283993,0.000092513656,0.00022670031,0.007921592,0.00036869384,0.00059307495,0.00077454455,0.00056775403,0.000023749277],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0019514071,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005033529,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0039333254,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00031646798,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006853454,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.020801663},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9956637,0.00007704089,0.000026669117,0.00025891833,0.000012040723,0.000027527944,0.0000121449075,0.0000012809028,0.0039208187],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9968708,0.0001957077,0.0001855413,0.00020292666,0.00001124194,0.000023492146,0.0000289993,0.0000034270026,0.0024779015],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9975413,0.000796085,0.00009099205,0.00021696693,0.00086832757,0.00048638278],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9930148,0.0023070222,0.0017699132,0.00027589212,0.0016267122,0.001005584],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003173016,0.00027673246,0.00034151343,0.00045459752,0.007580943,0.0021955152,0.00066214567,0.0008635745,0.0045928173],"category_scores_gemma":[0.021747522,0.00027633595,0.00040242844,0.0004976744,0.0021160094,0.000528142,0.001164985,0.0014277425,0.00041273577],"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":[0.0064422945,0.0021953708,0.49335495,0.00035169002,0.00041728132,0.0020545174,0.397956,0.000633866,0.016079726,0.002075651,0.0057906657,0.07264796],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008964817,0.00052983774,0.81662977,0.00017451528,0.00016943582,0.00016805908,0.17588136,0.0003348609,0.0009351644,0.00047022747,0.004519646,0.00009733639],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7905515,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.90816456,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.20944852,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008569731,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.011553395,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.42136395},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.95553017,0.00027121298,0.015020874,0.0037038988,0.000037338028,0.00025427857,0.00003732678,0.00001799874,0.025126867],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99476564,0.000080178856,0.0044538993,0.00021723157,0.00001896375,0.00007412815,0.000011029626,0.0000049218097,0.00037391912],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9797657,0.015480861,0.0005146673,0.0009977766,0.0028337887,0.00040723706],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.77296925,0.19896628,0.018114831,0.005678715,0.002738476,0.0015324717],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01838754,0.00028965945,0.00034949408,0.00074038457,0.0012487016,0.005731608,0.00095818535,0.0014697466,0.0044425973],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10424737,0.00043290624,0.00036166245,0.0003984388,0.0077326433,0.00788046,0.0025232371,0.002933752,0.0002047213],"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":[0.006113235,0.0035996148,0.24675816,0.0013316805,0.00028461014,0.00086281734,0.09680723,0.016169783,0.03803663,0.33127958,0.0032966556,0.25545993],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0010748352,0.005724536,0.38245356,0.00091863313,0.00044905668,0.0011563142,0.0569679,0.09908282,0.026448233,0.39121097,0.034001503,0.00051165855],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00096182566,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0010875978,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01838754,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0016299512,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0015696663,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.097243786},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.30713195,0.017239742,0.035360567,0.467917,0.0070750103,0.0015268932,0.00023004644,0.00011689665,0.16340196],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9122413,0.0024579286,0.012721959,0.05409833,0.0019356941,0.000827611,0.000060786555,0.00005168106,0.015604746],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.8769942,0.06276804,0.010718975,0.009957758,0.028306639,0.011254385],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.83323,0.11132407,0.012858217,0.006285019,0.029105429,0.0071973107],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.19739601,0.0005122181,0.001978818,0.0041100834,0.027092438,0.016476726,0.006454955,0.017478552,0.003996387],"category_scores_gemma":[0.30959553,0.001568601,0.0015958522,0.0025558954,0.02536867,0.009626754,0.012794541,0.021573482,0.0006498394],"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":[0.00024399739,0.00022075535,0.030209998,0.00045960114,0.00024593243,0.004450688,0.10759217,0.0013817119,0.00075059605,0.74063563,0.044241622,0.069567315],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000343103,0.0005627844,0.05466601,0.0049466067,0.00038398805,0.0019962164,0.12022576,0.007128765,0.0026668801,0.5439746,0.2625507,0.0005546095],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07785905,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.16030285,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.92214096,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.023805091,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.077787735,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9897536},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6094834,0.006792019,0.0026392227,0.0706994,0.0005225554,0.00008255027,0.00008938573,0.000019107372,0.30967236],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9817293,0.00087756576,0.00042914122,0.0032909252,0.00015067706,0.000027291444,0.000014536626,0.000011322097,0.0134692835],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99325114,0.003392083,0.00020597504,0.0006381652,0.00049975934,0.0020127636],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99099547,0.0059926985,0.0007755479,0.00026111587,0.001110114,0.000865062],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01239985,0.00024375264,0.00043549482,0.0016886331,0.017387155,0.0067729997,0.0013196775,0.007443386,0.00878492],"category_scores_gemma":[0.027387515,0.0004857606,0.00030447915,0.0016563296,0.021634622,0.0038298408,0.0054360027,0.007812828,0.00040510835],"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":[0.00015395708,0.00016140472,0.0050457,0.00004420048,0.000017515029,0.0004983117,0.047890555,0.000549281,0.00024921633,0.9151142,0.0073344037,0.022941202],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021660492,0.00016371791,0.05452578,0.00061175314,0.00006873453,0.0004071666,0.095170885,0.0018059217,0.0012094071,0.5354798,0.31013283,0.0002074027],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08047141,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1459613,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08047141,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.013743044,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01425965,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16000599},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.010846206,0.0245384,0.17696695,0.46499607,0.0037105926,0.00017222895,0.0001361358,0.00018821565,0.31844527],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8599275,0.01423785,0.053753406,0.04739367,0.007555686,0.000997475,0.00014780932,0.00025726165,0.015729338],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.92638427,0.05241226,0.0023943342,0.0033521953,0.012830452,0.0026265979],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95294696,0.03617918,0.002519828,0.004020626,0.0034375875,0.0008958726],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.05577126,0.0012730398,0.0018475965,0.0067304093,0.010092078,0.027692437,0.0059488076,0.014288514,0.0022443132],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05690611,0.0009769143,0.0020087613,0.003443827,0.1573651,0.02725932,0.010093369,0.021581048,0.00068053487],"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":[0.0000012718481,0.0000024797184,0.000018057506,0.00001075763,0.0000012663967,0.000008338323,0.00058311893,0.0000844399,0.000009206948,0.9983138,0.0004290335,0.0005382553],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000050357826,0.00000444583,0.000025635201,0.000062556646,0.0000017306575,0.000012067018,0.00035767484,0.00027449796,0.000023850764,0.98968774,0.009539996,0.0000046943933],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007980539,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0036779218,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9899079,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.015931625,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.021319345,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.29495013},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11968014,0.013698966,0.056084976,0.60584563,0.0064952136,0.001134646,0.0005107244,0.00068188534,0.19586782],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.83841217,0.005711996,0.046103038,0.066066414,0.004199819,0.0024503556,0.00039209166,0.0005090673,0.03615501],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9244975,0.058287777,0.0019351055,0.0030752253,0.007059951,0.0051444178],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.77065146,0.14915633,0.017842691,0.010125365,0.018895838,0.03332832],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08628108,0.0007874119,0.0014181134,0.005486383,0.012396113,0.018255379,0.003666972,0.011364029,0.031156315],"category_scores_gemma":[0.32376692,0.0013558225,0.001061765,0.0034914182,0.011962118,0.020989869,0.009748317,0.008419783,0.0072377715],"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":[0.00035605772,0.0011088306,0.031210063,0.0007311961,0.00041366552,0.00019284817,0.041852392,0.00138904,0.00054441206,0.27346283,0.19672948,0.45200914],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005418712,0.00037321975,0.04025404,0.0023448716,0.00021877357,0.00013742944,0.043767944,0.0030992257,0.0005647461,0.6527186,0.2554977,0.00048148714],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0063444446,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011362453,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08628108,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004373217,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0154171735,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.45630342},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9716467,0.0013410008,0.00022414153,0.011023652,0.000051077222,0.000066344124,0.00004334289,0.0000039104248,0.015599862],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9930934,0.0013883096,0.00022363187,0.00078270544,0.000012866608,0.000026543457,0.000016235379,0.00000782668,0.0044484134],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9953435,0.0021462562,0.000112332345,0.00019181242,0.0011500742,0.0010559509],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99318576,0.0037507731,0.0007387147,0.00018780962,0.0010828002,0.0010540626],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0051475335,0.00031924926,0.0004633914,0.0014255898,0.02579008,0.0049260133,0.0015817576,0.001895764,0.0020615747],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011109502,0.00032469703,0.00034072742,0.0017822235,0.007842836,0.0015857839,0.003916291,0.0031373983,0.00015873685],"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":[0.00005113343,0.000105582054,0.044406,0.00014048618,0.000022160135,0.0073142997,0.91224784,0.00016620023,0.00045089712,0.010439688,0.005417917,0.019237768],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000035539076,0.000029490297,0.017578052,0.00019816938,0.000013658541,0.000764449,0.9664824,0.00006913681,0.00025465793,0.00039871407,0.014187522,0.000020191272],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.76887995,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9140967,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.76887995,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.026297221,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.031475153,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4649623},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9716467,0.0013410008,0.00022414153,0.011023652,0.000051077222,0.000066344124,0.00004334289,0.0000039104248,0.015599862],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9930934,0.0013883096,0.00022363187,0.00078270544,0.000012866608,0.000026543457,0.000016235379,0.00000782668,0.0044484134],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9953435,0.0021462562,0.000112332345,0.00019181242,0.0011500742,0.0010559509],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99318576,0.0037507731,0.0007387147,0.00018780962,0.0010828002,0.0010540626],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0051475335,0.00031924926,0.0004633914,0.0014255898,0.02579008,0.0049260133,0.0015817576,0.001895764,0.0020615747],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011109502,0.00032469703,0.00034072742,0.0017822235,0.007842836,0.0015857839,0.003916291,0.0031373983,0.00015873685],"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":[0.00005113343,0.000105582054,0.044406,0.00014048618,0.000022160135,0.0073142997,0.91224784,0.00016620023,0.00045089712,0.010439688,0.005417917,0.019237768],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000035539076,0.000029490297,0.017578052,0.00019816938,0.000013658541,0.000764449,0.9664824,0.00006913681,0.00025465793,0.00039871407,0.014187522,0.000020191272],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.76887995,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9140967,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.76887995,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.026297221,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.031475153,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4649623},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9904992,0.00017944362,0.0054734135,0.0006376483,0.000014353894,0.000041133088,0.00002655149,0.000020738637,0.003107396],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99813026,0.00008194428,0.0014981378,0.000083429666,0.000009772738,0.000024790912,0.000048497488,0.000007088343,0.000116117735],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"simulation_or_modeling","domain_scores_codex":[0.97940683,0.013529043,0.0011321956,0.0010574828,0.0043008225,0.00057367055],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8236521,0.14131647,0.021675007,0.005450833,0.0050035953,0.0029020612],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03202751,0.0006119658,0.0006544923,0.002908585,0.0009401701,0.006010916,0.00084033224,0.0022192989,0.0019362274],"category_scores_gemma":[0.19302383,0.0006083217,0.0012923362,0.00076019665,0.0034275104,0.004937913,0.0026690443,0.002471973,0.00023868184],"study_design_candidate":"simulation_or_modeling","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":[0.0040303976,0.0015508116,0.71098876,0.0005879417,0.0015014348,0.0004008974,0.13838537,0.022898512,0.00633962,0.020874595,0.0017656418,0.0906761],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005849878,0.0042689727,0.6414584,0.00088433694,0.0006593089,0.0007928968,0.12177311,0.17212953,0.0035598476,0.04693497,0.0061612306,0.00079236267],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00319974,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019162137,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03202751,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0020516787,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011481149,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16937971},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00020487206,0.00062266015,0.0004981871,0.0036511256,0.009955207,0.0006340582,0.029590407,0.001048606,0.9537948],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0011620595,0.0005598146,0.00040241878,0.0024938318,0.0020774994,0.00026639356,0.010967373,0.00041323126,0.9816574],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9987525,0.00010851862,0.00010691958,0.00019838859,0.00070119405,0.00013255073],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99447775,0.0011951327,0.00023246533,0.0004996605,0.0027289279,0.0008660737],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011679484,0.0008651723,0.001269937,0.003701915,0.0022892156,0.0059600095,0.0018116126,0.0030991677,0.91126066],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00958869,0.0006389259,0.0007735972,0.003313018,0.00045408125,0.0026939912,0.0018423813,0.0023574862,0.8168237],"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":[0.000016410388,0.000017649669,0.000040775103,0.00015253067,9.2009907e-7,0.000021750247,0.000011417108,0.000018205606,0.0000688239,0.0011164104,0.98123103,0.017303864],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000015004314,0.000010551146,0.0002291644,0.00010949094,0.0000012931783,0.000025290858,0.00002438634,0.000030943804,0.00006887381,0.0007835236,0.99869746,0.0000040506798],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0025020014,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0056736353,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.088739336,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014105747,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0024343878,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.12657589},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9956702,0.00017288963,0.0011794616,0.000113004666,0.000008566173,0.000078085395,0.000022566579,0.000008601727,0.00274673],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9973936,0.00012544259,0.0018980671,0.000055434637,0.00001497701,0.00008728373,0.000020909532,0.000008823494,0.00039533127],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9853216,0.009228724,0.0012007197,0.0014115497,0.0022812271,0.00055636826],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8125967,0.1551207,0.020338487,0.0051005976,0.004639112,0.0022043628],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.013791351,0.0003115768,0.00043924694,0.001060162,0.00090640975,0.0039421534,0.0005726863,0.0010411013,0.004815231],"category_scores_gemma":[0.14481407,0.00046862388,0.0004157335,0.0004998727,0.00156983,0.0023841544,0.0018838574,0.0013304803,0.00036897248],"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":[0.021421922,0.003978853,0.40967554,0.0023757843,0.0012911552,0.00086151046,0.09033436,0.0028576837,0.18492194,0.0051125167,0.00093822746,0.27623048],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004956412,0.008191268,0.94280124,0.0005029339,0.0005048123,0.00037849083,0.016957235,0.0036447912,0.017331338,0.00622506,0.002786144,0.00018090726],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00101652,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001555199,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.013791351,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00081840367,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010859759,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.072936535},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9956702,0.00017288963,0.0011794616,0.000113004666,0.000008566173,0.000078085395,0.000022566579,0.000008601727,0.00274673],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9973936,0.00012544259,0.0018980671,0.000055434637,0.00001497701,0.00008728373,0.000020909532,0.000008823494,0.00039533127],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9853216,0.009228724,0.0012007197,0.0014115497,0.0022812271,0.00055636826],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8125967,0.1551207,0.020338487,0.0051005976,0.004639112,0.0022043628],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.013791351,0.0003115768,0.00043924694,0.001060162,0.00090640975,0.0039421534,0.0005726863,0.0010411013,0.004815231],"category_scores_gemma":[0.14481407,0.00046862388,0.0004157335,0.0004998727,0.00156983,0.0023841544,0.0018838574,0.0013304803,0.00036897248],"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":[0.021421922,0.003978853,0.40967554,0.0023757843,0.0012911552,0.00086151046,0.09033436,0.0028576837,0.18492194,0.0051125167,0.00093822746,0.27623048],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004956412,0.008191268,0.94280124,0.0005029339,0.0005048123,0.00037849083,0.016957235,0.0036447912,0.017331338,0.00622506,0.002786144,0.00018090726],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00101652,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001555199,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.013791351,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00081840367,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010859759,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.072936535},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.44635227,0.02133744,0.06514553,0.12886761,0.005640285,0.0025663085,0.0004933413,0.00038992654,0.3292072],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8759015,0.0036725088,0.0126945805,0.035080463,0.0008896664,0.0010887631,0.00017980488,0.00006835587,0.07042445],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9288388,0.032020938,0.0038246326,0.008099204,0.021068204,0.0061482014],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.82726943,0.1052905,0.01874521,0.017785482,0.022009714,0.008899664],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.064344965,0.00055958744,0.0016489939,0.0035892853,0.012936159,0.0076548695,0.0034245064,0.0060512926,0.013941492],"category_scores_gemma":[0.19804274,0.0008724839,0.0010326427,0.0013703443,0.008974107,0.0063038836,0.0086364215,0.008646156,0.002725392],"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":[0.0009376731,0.00040000153,0.03237683,0.0010888282,0.00025170355,0.0023966013,0.030013824,0.000978896,0.0022974648,0.5013557,0.06686607,0.36103642],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00031991897,0.001173626,0.042129688,0.0068347733,0.00038149543,0.0028904187,0.044181664,0.0024515747,0.005876724,0.35436854,0.53891176,0.00047975857],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0108528035,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.028753595,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.064344965,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0047902656,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.018523997,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.34029275},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97641355,0.0004956816,0.000193288,0.0006409735,0.000041136514,0.000054268105,0.00008468999,0.000008309388,0.022068113],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99703276,0.0003548683,0.00032510023,0.0001329177,0.000020816628,0.000016973225,0.000049319944,0.000005997258,0.0020613417],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9976851,0.0005650736,0.000071264614,0.00020609598,0.0011427845,0.00032971753],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9892474,0.0048503405,0.0022962464,0.00027205684,0.0024178636,0.000916098],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022149002,0.00033345804,0.0002633701,0.0017950946,0.007016784,0.0032788522,0.0005404485,0.0005944669,0.0051947203],"category_scores_gemma":[0.027226334,0.00026444325,0.0002134717,0.000907337,0.0021470226,0.0007664089,0.0015747097,0.0007188274,0.00027155405],"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":[0.0033178867,0.00058800454,0.64709544,0.000630283,0.00030132371,0.0016309334,0.14036766,0.00072737364,0.03447104,0.009668192,0.005028522,0.15617341],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004275718,0.00012946468,0.9393175,0.0002033817,0.00015958438,0.000179488,0.047362406,0.00042550027,0.0024764442,0.0011069346,0.008513472,0.00008302976],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.67080873,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8546009,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.32919127,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007874359,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.013044822,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6622599},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0015538265,0.00053933606,0.0012949221,0.004641885,0.0012794368,0.00079077703,0.21498875,0.0012745654,0.7736365],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.009518047,0.00094325276,0.0011442185,0.0021024954,0.00048253374,0.0007583579,0.091684036,0.0008995002,0.8924677],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9965894,0.00035252486,0.00022980726,0.00031334272,0.0020892804,0.00042563592],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99195695,0.0014149983,0.0003748802,0.0006307627,0.00498855,0.00063391455],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020904944,0.00071834296,0.001032495,0.0052062306,0.0024830538,0.0036609713,0.0016816691,0.0016527725,0.72421366],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01873589,0.0005833538,0.00064760156,0.005674897,0.0003268157,0.0019704096,0.0018139983,0.0027017593,0.46067074],"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":[0.00002079215,0.000021880569,0.00022306392,0.0000578722,0.0000029662242,0.000012096995,0.000018694589,0.000043312044,0.000039107385,0.0051974203,0.98224974,0.012113025],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000027822596,0.000021852893,0.0034933032,0.00013155286,0.0000059525687,0.000036168618,0.00006853172,0.00011934558,0.00015699818,0.0020031019,0.9939209,0.000014519273],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.022978606,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.024227774,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.27578634,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003230222,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007367733,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3933757},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9904992,0.00017944362,0.0054734135,0.0006376483,0.000014353894,0.000041133088,0.00002655149,0.000020738637,0.003107396],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99813026,0.00008194428,0.0014981378,0.000083429666,0.000009772738,0.000024790912,0.000048497488,0.000007088343,0.000116117735],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"simulation_or_modeling","domain_scores_codex":[0.97940683,0.013529043,0.0011321956,0.0010574828,0.0043008225,0.00057367055],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8236521,0.14131647,0.021675007,0.005450833,0.0050035953,0.0029020612],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03202751,0.0006119658,0.0006544923,0.002908585,0.0009401701,0.006010916,0.00084033224,0.0022192989,0.0019362274],"category_scores_gemma":[0.19302383,0.0006083217,0.0012923362,0.00076019665,0.0034275104,0.004937913,0.0026690443,0.002471973,0.00023868184],"study_design_candidate":"simulation_or_modeling","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":[0.0040303976,0.0015508116,0.71098876,0.0005879417,0.0015014348,0.0004008974,0.13838537,0.022898512,0.00633962,0.020874595,0.0017656418,0.0906761],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005849878,0.0042689727,0.6414584,0.00088433694,0.0006593089,0.0007928968,0.12177311,0.17212953,0.0035598476,0.04693497,0.0061612306,0.00079236267],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00319974,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019162137,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03202751,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0020516787,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011481149,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16937971},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99854845,0.000045968074,0.000084285464,0.00007279726,0.0000046734535,0.000010815962,0.000016146134,0.000001230634,0.0012156416],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99950826,0.00004279201,0.00010899419,0.000021840457,0.0000045414163,0.000008963067,0.000022281269,0.0000019615363,0.00028041657],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9957748,0.0024318038,0.00031778298,0.00026678084,0.0009118151,0.0002971],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.87440985,0.09852571,0.017559329,0.0019275929,0.004262834,0.003314651],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008604465,0.00017655565,0.00021826952,0.001018582,0.0007961551,0.0017091086,0.00033548093,0.0004567892,0.003979035],"category_scores_gemma":[0.075505435,0.00024404451,0.00033853232,0.00043205926,0.0009908935,0.0008344707,0.0009004981,0.00095644343,0.0003077196],"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":[0.0014616442,0.0009684059,0.9352914,0.00007540043,0.00023964996,0.00020035195,0.032119088,0.0003496233,0.0020713992,0.00047822582,0.00070263806,0.026042271],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002613198,0.00047263002,0.9790831,0.000043871856,0.000053200198,0.00009024777,0.018472426,0.0006068508,0.00040886106,0.00028173518,0.0004360118,0.000024862838],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006887595,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.010221565,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.008604465,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006145273,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009041741,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.045505285},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99122894,0.0004769064,0.0008280881,0.0016036243,0.000013160099,0.000034025757,0.0000345401,0.00000353468,0.0057772747],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9983266,0.00028323958,0.0007017161,0.00015999499,0.000024824869,0.000023630295,0.000030052479,0.000004815146,0.00044505272],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9726993,0.0199604,0.0015980799,0.00087990257,0.003998535,0.00086375605],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.251499,0.71037656,0.026657112,0.0038625924,0.00507176,0.0025329867],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.041240085,0.00022468572,0.00029387505,0.0016770526,0.00069438486,0.0034986408,0.0009367959,0.001973543,0.005772603],"category_scores_gemma":[0.48417103,0.00047864116,0.00038247928,0.000973874,0.002710075,0.0017480371,0.0017630702,0.003525867,0.0004260649],"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":[0.003571197,0.0033214078,0.8103264,0.00043184438,0.0014139923,0.00051633915,0.030078553,0.00508448,0.0023601728,0.0109277265,0.0015662907,0.1304017],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00027640664,0.001404178,0.93826836,0.00046720708,0.0007466076,0.0003627667,0.011682974,0.014276039,0.0021056104,0.028939998,0.0013273581,0.0001424321],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0026361158,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0032989916,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.041240085,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0013406256,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0018365671,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21810102},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9924004,0.00016186289,0.00006872903,0.00020172421,0.000035958674,0.000028906174,0.00008690881,0.000011982778,0.007003485],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.994136,0.00014448226,0.00017399373,0.00007250488,0.00004165611,0.00006403344,0.00016706869,0.000019034416,0.0051812143],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9952253,0.0027575877,0.00020940353,0.00042813877,0.00075996126,0.0006195535],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94524413,0.04019019,0.0057871165,0.0016416325,0.0010052148,0.0061317123],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004800108,0.00046693953,0.0006719131,0.0007010775,0.0009568941,0.002291606,0.0010642867,0.0010466344,0.019719062],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05659943,0.0002806136,0.0006465005,0.00039302086,0.0012242998,0.0010648165,0.0021938111,0.0020109506,0.0013566525],"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":[0.064101584,0.03443501,0.6991316,0.0003864321,0.0016106337,0.0018678219,0.006109878,0.0063631763,0.010652326,0.011959207,0.010121944,0.15326048],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006326064,0.008202356,0.97707033,0.00015356159,0.00035886257,0.00020713238,0.0014982291,0.0034046834,0.0010934973,0.0050636977,0.0022213086,0.00009376787],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0031124286,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0043908143,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.019719062,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00082691456,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011675697,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.065966845},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.30888957,0.0054826466,0.0061373105,0.2645474,0.003254078,0.0000367398,0.00019210938,0.00007194236,0.41138822],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9563574,0.0006467098,0.00064367143,0.0067525827,0.00033084044,0.000012585754,0.000024401357,0.00004469401,0.035187066],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9968574,0.0018412328,0.000066167435,0.00034050355,0.00039049087,0.0005041712],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982064,0.0010049056,0.00019662565,0.000112511785,0.00020810872,0.0002714943],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0035545335,0.0003452198,0.00037758087,0.0004108701,0.009783146,0.009244382,0.00090590346,0.006109314,0.008373371],"category_scores_gemma":[0.010774663,0.0002517404,0.0002953429,0.0005416682,0.00782572,0.004405608,0.002913368,0.007537005,0.0013306228],"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":[0.00027594878,0.00008986988,0.0039141984,0.00012042719,0.00009774942,0.0011723477,0.10590286,0.0010881445,0.0018457933,0.75537074,0.10931832,0.02080368],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008219087,0.00012034933,0.017638948,0.000372083,0.00009609801,0.0006719772,0.1636211,0.0029830881,0.0025131453,0.23880301,0.57295483,0.00014311545],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.014859173,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03186557,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.014859173,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0044738646,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0027763508,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.032460332},"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":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.46816048,0.0128440205,0.0016499084,0.013179158,0.0003118509,0.00003233393,0.00021071952,0.00005177074,0.50355977],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.95005816,0.0035375773,0.00039675776,0.00062824617,0.0001171888,0.0000118327025,0.00006145969,0.000010189655,0.045178525],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9996263,0.00016977395,0.000015892041,0.00002037817,0.00013201784,0.00003563107],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986191,0.000935937,0.00019038601,0.000028071601,0.0001485941,0.00007803462],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003692211,0.00005057748,0.000097544376,0.000389979,0.00090828503,0.0017704868,0.0001540004,0.000338132,0.007977324],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0027159539,0.00006677292,0.00005716126,0.00042254757,0.0013028533,0.00096658623,0.0009728767,0.0004923102,0.00031449163],"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":[0.000109238346,0.00021650366,0.15421745,0.00042649565,0.000040906525,0.0039513665,0.07508932,0.00218514,0.0015721923,0.28342757,0.12835886,0.35040504],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000011342874,0.00031051302,0.55491865,0.00090346567,0.000026283738,0.005060008,0.0727647,0.0021105674,0.0011684548,0.08367072,0.2789963,0.00005906153],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0061725155,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.012492035,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.007977324,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009750206,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004492394,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.026686847},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.228275,0.018698948,0.04266772,0.067168064,0.0023819113,0.0013815623,0.004514796,0.0004704323,0.6344415],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9576418,0.0038683645,0.004777988,0.018160911,0.00094322424,0.0005860691,0.00047803423,0.00013338895,0.013410292],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9784687,0.009027125,0.0013537607,0.00408924,0.005802893,0.0012583204],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.81601626,0.14835009,0.017604945,0.008491264,0.0066844686,0.0028530085],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.022535833,0.0006170289,0.0010682442,0.002281444,0.002341315,0.0028153611,0.001462543,0.003678998,0.05400114],"category_scores_gemma":[0.11799359,0.0003731905,0.0011531865,0.001968316,0.0077382685,0.0046629976,0.0044883164,0.0047869296,0.002608037],"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":[0.001063651,0.0006067892,0.10780648,0.002047568,0.0009304779,0.0004695468,0.0033516267,0.0012635934,0.0011437273,0.67538416,0.03235508,0.1735773],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00083776814,0.0017725719,0.2563939,0.0020480056,0.0016476336,0.0012886116,0.0037801506,0.0030870868,0.0034082343,0.5637286,0.16178726,0.00022019248],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0037221522,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0035704786,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05400114,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0031978546,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0034112774,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.18065178},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9474846,0.00028220887,0.020699434,0.0021606104,0.0006739428,0.0005747937,0.00013285612,0.00006569489,0.027925787],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98765624,0.000120646364,0.009204483,0.0004324148,0.00017657115,0.0006223733,0.000071554605,0.00007018059,0.001645417],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","domain_scores_codex":[0.9736536,0.017176436,0.0014492681,0.0031675745,0.0040909373,0.00046221438],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.5743704,0.37621245,0.02314375,0.01901091,0.0048728115,0.002389669],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.030722335,0.0008393276,0.0010586905,0.0008663508,0.0020157432,0.0052281027,0.0025920654,0.0028092994,0.016158178],"category_scores_gemma":[0.33711213,0.0008855779,0.0004996129,0.0007071998,0.006845622,0.007664979,0.0036002232,0.0047458257,0.0007864509],"study_design_candidate":"bench_or_experimental","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":[0.053853866,0.020577615,0.04000794,0.0031382397,0.00083819346,0.000766658,0.10556446,0.008340491,0.104346335,0.52118903,0.0059163664,0.13546076],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.017767547,0.035554703,0.06531307,0.00090077915,0.0011312308,0.0012852866,0.021598032,0.10105003,0.036563247,0.69934434,0.018815672,0.00067616225],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008178962,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00047389948,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.030722335,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0010493972,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0018870861,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1624772},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.931006,0.0022943,0.022390306,0.0062627154,0.00053375924,0.00073985406,0.0011299866,0.000153034,0.035490073],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9895287,0.00039442437,0.0064268135,0.00042311157,0.00013843563,0.0002244749,0.0007212164,0.000038947073,0.0021037227],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.90830135,0.045790464,0.010131614,0.007917808,0.024765732,0.0030930901],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.46767563,0.41862747,0.063341044,0.017775383,0.028149413,0.004431063],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.090962656,0.00048500902,0.001689442,0.0060719885,0.0030281143,0.007615561,0.002133457,0.002718493,0.012622168],"category_scores_gemma":[0.5353405,0.00078179734,0.0014971065,0.003315724,0.002488671,0.007957101,0.0070503834,0.0037128858,0.0012546356],"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":[0.016886808,0.0013939444,0.45098773,0.0019169697,0.002094687,0.0017311022,0.030537682,0.013949964,0.005161952,0.042385515,0.02323788,0.4097158],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013669335,0.0035059552,0.6833202,0.0030332038,0.0025270865,0.0018965924,0.05285766,0.064594254,0.014621353,0.1488781,0.022590747,0.0008078202],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005363151,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0054068207,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.090962656,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0038437045,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0055419984,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.48106223},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.70477873,0.0055099,0.0049060914,0.117362455,0.0012075373,0.0008285719,0.0006158252,0.00023688054,0.16455398],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9279935,0.0026413728,0.003339384,0.013521939,0.00010950274,0.00016451231,0.00027444054,0.0000645318,0.051890854],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9889299,0.0012888785,0.00022525985,0.0007206693,0.0032152454,0.0056200717],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9885622,0.0015064157,0.00051288225,0.00040343715,0.0045724967,0.0044425474],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007267025,0.0003185682,0.00051322486,0.0019787108,0.039127257,0.0073206364,0.004544705,0.003003085,0.0064896652],"category_scores_gemma":[0.018380187,0.000550803,0.00043298444,0.0026321283,0.007614984,0.0018110203,0.006825212,0.005797022,0.0005959614],"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":[0.0005183187,0.0004181495,0.11021977,0.00072351936,0.0001866536,0.0044714794,0.15334372,0.003953118,0.0048337886,0.1739115,0.2782,0.26922002],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014723439,0.00029771312,0.21624479,0.0010154552,0.00020950648,0.00067467085,0.23053932,0.003244685,0.0030201953,0.012393953,0.53181356,0.00039894416],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9914664,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9980508,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1239927,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1239927,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.3655896,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8996342},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.060799483,0.022528194,0.16722943,0.042063,0.0038085587,0.000612666,0.0006709212,0.00038057883,0.7019072],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6999108,0.010541405,0.06543933,0.03102129,0.0032215382,0.0009098228,0.0010213485,0.00045292897,0.18748152],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.94206357,0.020819169,0.0055314703,0.0062522395,0.02319391,0.0021397078],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9222184,0.037211057,0.005776551,0.020185785,0.012936652,0.0016716782],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03293049,0.00068115455,0.001340365,0.0043054735,0.003526844,0.012568581,0.003177908,0.0056528174,0.008475132],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08779333,0.0006941801,0.0015901831,0.0015897395,0.01996332,0.0093829855,0.011855628,0.011239547,0.0037755715],"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":[0.00012482588,0.00007021623,0.0016863722,0.0004595761,0.00007044676,0.00086901046,0.002968813,0.00017833104,0.0018204681,0.92952955,0.005160618,0.05706172],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000095728596,0.00030762827,0.004080445,0.004738699,0.00021301219,0.0024634188,0.001361635,0.00092996785,0.0106111765,0.44988889,0.52520627,0.000103157945],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015304806,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002000956,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03293049,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0033895967,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.011005772,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17415518},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.118150406,0.07635957,0.05253536,0.41632223,0.0072141015,0.00070557726,0.0011795085,0.00062614435,0.3269071],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7636763,0.027220035,0.07318257,0.06834326,0.002343228,0.0006539632,0.0007592656,0.00023650061,0.0635849],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.96995586,0.007880275,0.0030784102,0.0045994334,0.0121698575,0.0023162365],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9332443,0.01722824,0.004676833,0.004688272,0.03654579,0.0036166776],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.046053976,0.00048389754,0.00066041003,0.006987736,0.0064127077,0.011775435,0.0024482475,0.004942291,0.002542685],"category_scores_gemma":[0.041437037,0.0009495418,0.00091317034,0.007002164,0.014961112,0.0073616817,0.0036330475,0.010401852,0.00047798525],"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":[0.00002983435,0.000056759716,0.0065043233,0.00033895895,0.000039141818,0.000251032,0.0042866967,0.0006104538,0.0008432976,0.86732674,0.037053358,0.08265949],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000031873304,0.00010585931,0.0336494,0.001494191,0.0000681659,0.00023813394,0.0022966228,0.002210044,0.0016709076,0.09028938,0.8677228,0.00022258487],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.11351938,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.090494186,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.11351938,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.028790727,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.06529343,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2435596},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9439092,0.0016059076,0.008175161,0.009636015,0.00032641782,0.0006262354,0.00025756643,0.00009311709,0.035370372],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9906983,0.00058460137,0.0042823204,0.001940234,0.00013737714,0.00019717928,0.00008832619,0.000027961836,0.0020437692],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97133666,0.014270841,0.0017727375,0.0015815313,0.009383059,0.0016551607],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.81004226,0.14069042,0.021982575,0.008595333,0.01651984,0.0021695606],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.050278515,0.00036858086,0.0008358465,0.0011277555,0.0030882293,0.002959176,0.0014790659,0.0021116976,0.0029138667],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2772234,0.00052431016,0.00043453832,0.0011122179,0.0056103957,0.0019488605,0.0023064262,0.003822624,0.00045805343],"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":[0.008046105,0.0022374464,0.22510548,0.0012356199,0.00080988277,0.00037377473,0.06067634,0.014230039,0.011681641,0.092089735,0.018758593,0.5647554],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00090694363,0.0023457524,0.8652183,0.0014374744,0.0009353262,0.000059345122,0.008749684,0.011685844,0.011101349,0.05169651,0.045409717,0.00045383608],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.20163046,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.34757367,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.20163046,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009431477,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.023967009,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.40091372},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9439092,0.0016059076,0.008175161,0.009636015,0.00032641782,0.0006262354,0.00025756643,0.00009311709,0.035370372],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9906983,0.00058460137,0.0042823204,0.001940234,0.00013737714,0.00019717928,0.00008832619,0.000027961836,0.0020437692],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97133666,0.014270841,0.0017727375,0.0015815313,0.009383059,0.0016551607],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.81004226,0.14069042,0.021982575,0.008595333,0.01651984,0.0021695606],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.050278515,0.00036858086,0.0008358465,0.0011277555,0.0030882293,0.002959176,0.0014790659,0.0021116976,0.0029138667],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2772234,0.00052431016,0.00043453832,0.0011122179,0.0056103957,0.0019488605,0.0023064262,0.003822624,0.00045805343],"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":[0.008046105,0.0022374464,0.22510548,0.0012356199,0.00080988277,0.00037377473,0.06067634,0.014230039,0.011681641,0.092089735,0.018758593,0.5647554],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00090694363,0.0023457524,0.8652183,0.0014374744,0.0009353262,0.000059345122,0.008749684,0.011685844,0.011101349,0.05169651,0.045409717,0.00045383608],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.20163046,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.34757367,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.20163046,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009431477,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.023967009,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.40091372},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9104056,0.003314525,0.0146185765,0.01545129,0.0004995406,0.00029314318,0.00024582187,0.000058469224,0.05511297],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99625456,0.00025590995,0.0014491857,0.00073980185,0.00014121842,0.00005058044,0.000027896565,0.000014047516,0.0010668249],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9615191,0.031039221,0.00076974236,0.0017069031,0.0036770524,0.0012880062],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8878642,0.08277321,0.015100563,0.004661892,0.0077890614,0.001811075],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03693733,0.00020360007,0.00047297365,0.0017663809,0.0018575753,0.0023389538,0.00039778263,0.0011228834,0.0067389035],"category_scores_gemma":[0.15763538,0.00028430455,0.0003303174,0.0011519481,0.002270686,0.0010509533,0.0012955798,0.0013312293,0.000825309],"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":[0.0024011242,0.00053303613,0.58766216,0.00045795154,0.00058986817,0.00025444542,0.017654223,0.003614309,0.0041441103,0.110471815,0.015808266,0.25640875],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00017125327,0.00035570373,0.84719634,0.000408698,0.00017328335,0.0001960229,0.0059909406,0.009536531,0.0038825476,0.11775435,0.0142224245,0.00011189273],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0035943864,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005387421,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03693733,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014005542,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001598056,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.19534558},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99212766,0.00007785003,0.003996867,0.000297543,0.000006137656,0.00004963427,0.00005743384,0.000011654113,0.0033751961],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99822944,0.00004464647,0.0010948625,0.000049886166,0.00000940383,0.000053967542,0.00006562212,0.000008931677,0.0004432696],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9916881,0.0048715374,0.0004152575,0.0011242714,0.0011195551,0.00078129076],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.76997316,0.19337815,0.019773025,0.008494899,0.004159768,0.0042209714],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00969743,0.00020422242,0.0004963256,0.0010395071,0.00082586997,0.0022075316,0.00077014195,0.0013235487,0.0040949034],"category_scores_gemma":[0.114591904,0.00046288082,0.00079617207,0.0011719,0.0016089596,0.0027927733,0.0029162837,0.0023572876,0.00048573053],"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":[0.0024814443,0.0012866315,0.8524778,0.00022753036,0.0004382477,0.0003777776,0.05524172,0.0034107887,0.006884193,0.007109328,0.00065666344,0.06940789],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000040303643,0.00034999705,0.9829593,0.000027116916,0.00008016047,0.00015479757,0.0050070067,0.005652926,0.0007943671,0.004330902,0.000556743,0.000046411024],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0018357141,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0013209204,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.00969743,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00059601176,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00075510587,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.051285505},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.07721504,0.009668642,0.6556791,0.111802936,0.001051408,0.00024364659,0.00039272028,0.0003198154,0.14362678],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9198873,0.0017066526,0.07191195,0.0027609486,0.0007011884,0.00016892405,0.000090652764,0.00004535901,0.0027270291],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.973789,0.018040227,0.001245891,0.0022177612,0.0037381528,0.0009689092],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8568115,0.12245304,0.007098239,0.006076682,0.0061680097,0.0013924907],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.030644128,0.0007365443,0.0015430864,0.0035702495,0.0021571633,0.010190064,0.0028463413,0.005482438,0.0040272684],"category_scores_gemma":[0.082434855,0.00057549466,0.0011650432,0.0023313675,0.038694117,0.0099332575,0.0042521395,0.0069345394,0.0004576613],"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":[0.000012978696,0.000014595416,0.00026279734,0.000036764224,0.000016094926,0.000031647498,0.000111063986,0.0044442695,0.000023753433,0.991359,0.00059829163,0.0030887332],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000075170165,0.0000044789726,0.000059206373,0.0000296855,0.0000032745281,0.000007811303,0.000028895529,0.0058906022,0.00002610914,0.9931652,0.00077179255,0.000005326277],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0036018998,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0025405118,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.030644128,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005015902,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0051143453,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1620636},"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":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9665205,0.0007380139,0.0017981203,0.0045963204,0.00015729296,0.00009802439,0.00007024748,0.000013792702,0.0260077],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99253607,0.0003666971,0.00089767436,0.0007905194,0.000024570452,0.000070644266,0.00003493671,0.000019173027,0.0052596102],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9842477,0.010969095,0.0005614664,0.0009737334,0.0020990283,0.0011490481],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9834139,0.011615936,0.0018775851,0.0005565632,0.0016508597,0.00088515086],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012835109,0.0004330513,0.00047300002,0.00161768,0.020899989,0.0067059402,0.0009371744,0.0018995933,0.002778427],"category_scores_gemma":[0.029869348,0.00038242203,0.00030364832,0.0014007164,0.011481297,0.002836523,0.008055302,0.0027526258,0.0002654724],"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":[0.000044642053,0.000015443822,0.0031051878,0.00008965745,0.000007570949,0.0003734755,0.9862416,0.000028323304,0.0009837764,0.004622262,0.00082443404,0.0036636184],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000003532519,0.000016854958,0.005273145,0.00021887294,0.000011055521,0.00013614986,0.97750413,0.00008424087,0.0005596239,0.0016810098,0.01448143,0.000029915738],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.041775465,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.10243537,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.041775465,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008734267,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0086761005,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.083064616},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.068771005,0.022415351,0.011057821,0.40037075,0.00338313,0.0002956723,0.00045598877,0.00016076757,0.4930895],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8556534,0.006479966,0.0049952148,0.03623451,0.0011205312,0.00025155762,0.00020304376,0.00019375497,0.09486801],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9441474,0.019944575,0.0012818917,0.0022275525,0.020355977,0.012042695],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9250643,0.049025554,0.0027075259,0.002429947,0.015453309,0.0053193243],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.06321527,0.0007321704,0.001304021,0.0035745827,0.022086104,0.01876873,0.005152779,0.010295183,0.008856793],"category_scores_gemma":[0.16912943,0.00092713407,0.00078579545,0.0047286274,0.02135371,0.005958701,0.0054298756,0.0138932895,0.0010179131],"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":[0.0001905149,0.00007441144,0.0053307014,0.00016759492,0.00004986756,0.000167214,0.030385563,0.0015720645,0.00016493618,0.5302491,0.27077088,0.16087712],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00018721964,0.00012700928,0.05952696,0.001843671,0.00023436004,0.00016003805,0.05430528,0.005920373,0.0011120704,0.40162733,0.47451264,0.00044304473],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9371868,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9737152,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09839739,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.09839739,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.27044645,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7139264},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9918777,0.00054432073,0.0012409688,0.00043979767,0.000013036038,0.00020373054,0.00026618445,0.0000023787368,0.005412047],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9980806,0.00028115677,0.0006154701,0.00015499817,0.000019332847,0.00011109095,0.00022881656,0.000003872599,0.00050466234],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9712269,0.014329825,0.0025525193,0.0019605283,0.008055588,0.0018746853],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6035509,0.3150908,0.045377634,0.012146113,0.019853076,0.0039814245],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.033282585,0.0002965084,0.0005482913,0.004014495,0.0029959793,0.0028282823,0.0016110797,0.0015345972,0.0032492357],"category_scores_gemma":[0.23242451,0.00029788094,0.00042351417,0.0041386625,0.0030091987,0.0037993148,0.0040853447,0.0019417059,0.00045294708],"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":[0.0005149621,0.0005884674,0.8720315,0.00040891522,0.0002686732,0.0012723649,0.07263645,0.0013416851,0.00048226785,0.010294903,0.004145008,0.036014866],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000969459,0.00038389862,0.8430361,0.00067276554,0.00016190234,0.0013236832,0.12320006,0.0053664697,0.0011383471,0.00817597,0.016340977,0.00010290943],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.016478814,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.021886826,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.033282585,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0027920841,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003638131,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17601728},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8870387,0.0016369832,0.0010143083,0.009428375,0.0003940016,0.00007438449,0.00018877757,0.00003837086,0.100186095],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9856645,0.0007160818,0.00043099144,0.0010376765,0.0000975115,0.000023957535,0.000103642684,0.000017201515,0.011908389],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99696106,0.0011083145,0.00029024022,0.0002528275,0.0009224629,0.00046511253],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9856127,0.0075915027,0.0037492244,0.00058771693,0.0018040463,0.0006547627],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003133498,0.00014329825,0.00011924862,0.0025291918,0.0024234175,0.0035002073,0.00057225686,0.0009680507,0.004747326],"category_scores_gemma":[0.019454123,0.00023635094,0.00010021411,0.0016181074,0.0019940378,0.0016869667,0.001427186,0.0014762256,0.0007456388],"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":[0.0003500388,0.0003890457,0.300621,0.00042799415,0.00003222747,0.005446735,0.22513057,0.0002615813,0.002593742,0.06207234,0.03865334,0.36402136],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001162983,0.0001908744,0.6869586,0.0007078931,0.000040296298,0.0030803701,0.12846284,0.00078093656,0.0018405349,0.005049726,0.17280792,0.00006836671],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011242763,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01793851,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.011242763,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0021743865,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0019473889,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.022354662},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9842054,0.0012417677,0.00016463923,0.003850465,0.000058277874,0.00018142228,0.0026482579,0.000024006678,0.0076257936],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.992382,0.000894534,0.00018573472,0.0005122395,0.000020792308,0.00004961954,0.0008833614,0.000015768386,0.005055903],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9839019,0.0027101354,0.0004846085,0.0008274808,0.004417177,0.007658679],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94915533,0.017213454,0.0051209917,0.0010475046,0.016166858,0.011295957],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0058118566,0.00061216357,0.0017929383,0.0037895578,0.010152546,0.0052401987,0.005499543,0.002534359,0.0081142215],"category_scores_gemma":[0.036973666,0.000944157,0.0020015426,0.00846149,0.003955441,0.0012850325,0.0034082863,0.005037395,0.0004359274],"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":[0.0039025273,0.0018043389,0.8887446,0.00045713206,0.0018587296,0.0009508662,0.008319906,0.018634036,0.00058479933,0.014405167,0.02482221,0.035515618],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00038921912,0.0005828751,0.95098746,0.00018707174,0.00094155385,0.000102585094,0.024918655,0.011652273,0.00048291456,0.0011783696,0.008377209,0.00019983732],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9990683,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9995369,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.19721901,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.19721901,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.2912287,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9311122},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99475855,0.000041314186,0.0011045553,0.00012889272,0.000009928831,0.00001962376,0.0000069546027,0.000008338076,0.0039218767],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99936193,0.000025075058,0.0002956045,0.000023739229,0.00000263358,0.000009259484,0.000010297911,0.0000025359932,0.00026890135],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99723935,0.0016279009,0.00010143741,0.00019226797,0.0006386261,0.00020045725],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99252856,0.0030537262,0.0018381425,0.00088233536,0.0011147049,0.0005825644],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003493421,0.0003598023,0.0002350466,0.00076823914,0.00211022,0.0036767283,0.00072970113,0.0007957117,0.0020266068],"category_scores_gemma":[0.017035892,0.00034684615,0.000304062,0.00025004536,0.004401105,0.0018910032,0.0023346995,0.0013204317,0.00018726653],"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":[0.0005544154,0.0004911923,0.203307,0.00025284558,0.00007430889,0.0011708912,0.7412771,0.00076996454,0.017445821,0.012578547,0.00085339544,0.021224558],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004793716,0.0013343407,0.21041878,0.00017305856,0.0000855209,0.0029851706,0.75763,0.004885505,0.004581107,0.0061981482,0.011472056,0.00018846015],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0033449347,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0032742957,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0036767283,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012578861,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00071623,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.018475235},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00049728836,0.0009281546,0.00024473376,0.006252584,0.0034820656,0.000043225973,0.0013395873,0.000373891,0.9868385],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0016167134,0.0006215181,0.00012126887,0.0016773958,0.00047173514,0.00001622374,0.00048564904,0.000117895834,0.9948716],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99928683,0.000047879676,0.00004110916,0.00021606708,0.00029317327,0.00011494284],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99852353,0.00023934331,0.000079251906,0.00017843637,0.00054921117,0.00043017176],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00050438015,0.0009331448,0.0009522508,0.001163439,0.0022770066,0.0070739063,0.0011001198,0.0058903233,0.93253016],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0032705816,0.0003187359,0.0005321377,0.0011601781,0.0011420987,0.0028938141,0.0021129288,0.0023886631,0.88929135],"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":[0.000057155154,0.000046526628,0.0005604548,0.00026208736,0.000007274339,0.00016992138,0.00010672634,0.00006285209,0.00057015923,0.01108037,0.8276097,0.15946676],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000060792772,0.000008878798,0.00048569977,0.000109508685,0.000001448465,0.000060158392,0.00008551601,0.00002977937,0.00007223353,0.00096594775,0.9981718,0.0000029494036],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002332053,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0037561683,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.067469835,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0011628064,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0017119469,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09623742},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7666692,0.009181019,0.06264503,0.024554739,0.00076031906,0.0014538801,0.00041227535,0.00011166422,0.13421181],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.981351,0.0027492745,0.010942807,0.0016153692,0.00021444487,0.00074026216,0.00010691503,0.000051503837,0.0022284633],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.8518233,0.13255237,0.0034126907,0.003498106,0.0057444787,0.0029690338],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.62012243,0.3451493,0.010786357,0.014612977,0.007141578,0.0021873557],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.06548914,0.0007663111,0.00064993266,0.009775005,0.016157769,0.012287608,0.003942451,0.003450897,0.0035663925],"category_scores_gemma":[0.16017285,0.00094270933,0.00049975223,0.0045333137,0.040139556,0.014123695,0.013167178,0.004537508,0.00036895313],"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":[0.000016782413,0.000035770572,0.0035318162,0.00017254788,0.000011402222,0.00063796196,0.96332014,0.000114609575,0.00020793367,0.018812666,0.0009020395,0.012236335],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000009116448,0.00004215564,0.0037770797,0.0011266307,0.000011419702,0.000614483,0.9224269,0.0003985151,0.00049172237,0.024108306,0.046949964,0.00004368694],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011675571,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.021160664,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.98384225,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00826252,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007629115,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.34634382},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99775404,0.000053185173,0.00031873514,0.00008337341,0.0000068779254,0.000019056488,0.000009454902,0.0000029896883,0.0017523621],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9992218,0.00003186944,0.00044298265,0.00003737915,0.000005415492,0.000015264864,0.000017058217,0.000001424533,0.00022697468],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99813676,0.0009327149,0.00012284574,0.00020322215,0.00044762183,0.00015680982],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9910697,0.0037207433,0.003637786,0.0004022791,0.0005786348,0.0005907855],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0033720229,0.000243571,0.00021837444,0.0005621336,0.0008098489,0.0011161296,0.00024158681,0.00053043873,0.0029053548],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02168039,0.00014174548,0.00014106213,0.00020476193,0.00062807876,0.00040352673,0.000722969,0.000583147,0.00029409284],"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":[0.006464186,0.0016830978,0.7729023,0.00027813506,0.0002972377,0.00082672323,0.019698098,0.0020298453,0.080150604,0.004628106,0.0015463345,0.10949527],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001487624,0.0015203872,0.96829814,0.00011892289,0.0001107884,0.00061013346,0.0081018135,0.0036807691,0.0101547865,0.0049396097,0.002238347,0.00007755157],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0014839583,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0028488704,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0033720229,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00042760596,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005836272,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.017833233},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9965289,0.00008481046,0.000065432025,0.0002010091,0.000012586117,0.0000231066,0.00003981436,0.0000018526408,0.0030425051],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99747926,0.00013806677,0.00018130544,0.00014805101,0.000012433311,0.000014984811,0.000066786,0.000003107794,0.0019560484],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","domain_scores_codex":[0.99810934,0.00045747522,0.00007572647,0.00018926086,0.0007727688,0.00039550028],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9920363,0.0019694038,0.00225963,0.00032141324,0.0022347511,0.0011785378],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0030356075,0.00021000241,0.0002782577,0.00063843554,0.0040935404,0.0016753871,0.000447563,0.00045246788,0.004897391],"category_scores_gemma":[0.018596303,0.00017591071,0.00032862157,0.00045580836,0.0013640326,0.00061847933,0.0010517415,0.00072617125,0.00039254347],"study_design_candidate":"bench_or_experimental","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":[0.0013637608,0.0004647444,0.874991,0.00010003292,0.00015266865,0.00058194424,0.07482852,0.00022791293,0.004087944,0.0010784311,0.0031798235,0.038943168],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001867146,0.00012877192,0.9501923,0.00006746776,0.00005228387,0.00010798131,0.045214016,0.00022976488,0.00046971464,0.00024486115,0.003233114,0.000041162722],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6990006,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8698515,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3009994,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0051293955,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008199507,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6055441},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9987091,0.000049688824,0.00026778245,0.000033969183,0.000011072229,0.000059356924,0.000019696263,0.0000034127527,0.0008459035],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9970697,0.00010678759,0.001894348,0.00004706922,0.000022561757,0.00010731091,0.00007940951,0.0000035762012,0.0006691222],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9930101,0.004213926,0.0008066576,0.00035067438,0.0013082935,0.00031036785],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9399971,0.03468586,0.015503916,0.002327743,0.005587468,0.001897995],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012425055,0.00036018464,0.00055639667,0.001102639,0.0012176957,0.001879054,0.00034474835,0.00088083115,0.0035936674],"category_scores_gemma":[0.09066038,0.0003065729,0.000666932,0.00043895785,0.0008283941,0.000850699,0.0012157967,0.0007452907,0.00065968063],"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":[0.008239961,0.0014779367,0.79337496,0.000473985,0.00048764356,0.0012445231,0.048500933,0.001651658,0.041780338,0.000970283,0.0017890251,0.1000087],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013020268,0.0028605775,0.96257025,0.00017942235,0.0001478958,0.00048047374,0.023148812,0.0022727142,0.006058335,0.00076172216,0.0012765835,0.000113085815],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0017285831,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0053282618,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.012425055,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005672348,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00071824226,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06571072},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.036695335,0.0047774063,0.048918176,0.35477272,0.0018716631,0.00013959863,0.00007909099,0.00006550398,0.5526805],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.93567336,0.0014436201,0.0077437796,0.023504917,0.0010786107,0.00016718655,0.000027722748,0.00009351299,0.030267276],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97544575,0.013454912,0.0008007965,0.003220721,0.004798949,0.0022788257],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9825021,0.011949382,0.0013354425,0.0013114576,0.0018771336,0.0010244546],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.027827777,0.0006026625,0.0010556726,0.0016271515,0.0083536375,0.013489727,0.0024325575,0.0107586235,0.0054681697],"category_scores_gemma":[0.033760156,0.00049521984,0.0010424848,0.0010591152,0.047378704,0.011149858,0.0072900546,0.014823519,0.0012863115],"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":[0.000009505001,0.000007611858,0.000073347364,0.000011453941,0.0000076141814,0.00004546681,0.0017917483,0.00019884236,0.000040856514,0.99119055,0.0048084967,0.0018146081],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000011538528,0.000010114782,0.00013308284,0.00008492362,0.0000068339987,0.000027574972,0.001051942,0.0004849242,0.0001521111,0.9688931,0.029118763,0.00002503638],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0052867373,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005022811,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.027827777,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008175427,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0050221197,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14716917},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9736484,0.00094083697,0.00040487395,0.001843621,0.000031578693,0.000045975965,0.000056736422,0.0000044603976,0.023023594],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9982122,0.0004083943,0.00016774477,0.00009006534,0.000008600577,0.000013455456,0.000023912187,0.0000019109082,0.0010736961],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9954596,0.0021356873,0.00027623054,0.00022415488,0.0008417814,0.0010624484],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99441564,0.0027130872,0.0008955912,0.00036710728,0.0011052522,0.00050320977],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003212023,0.00008037859,0.00021323636,0.0028991315,0.0022818367,0.0026492632,0.0008799684,0.00056181627,0.004070561],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011332566,0.00011737712,0.0003282242,0.0019609802,0.002479571,0.0024937654,0.0025524306,0.00085146655,0.00022556554],"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":[0.0005559949,0.0005094436,0.4100745,0.00083014223,0.0001639963,0.0058274353,0.27562025,0.00062351284,0.0026800733,0.13758136,0.0036685222,0.16186474],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008838628,0.00026515353,0.65125775,0.00047290008,0.00011685926,0.0018755184,0.31676987,0.00040096865,0.0011974298,0.007582073,0.020008944,0.00004372295],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010268243,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.025642099,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010268243,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0023961768,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0032804983,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.020416975},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.28212017,0.0015802656,0.5451655,0.10411831,0.0020873,0.00069713016,0.0005553731,0.00049368845,0.06318224],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.91184604,0.00041657046,0.078243494,0.0053648716,0.0011491036,0.00025591746,0.00018350921,0.000098472825,0.0024420698],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.95231664,0.017817687,0.0046135634,0.008265052,0.014551459,0.0024356307],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.5217795,0.40257502,0.021645375,0.03545088,0.014981001,0.0035683122],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.061388917,0.0011961728,0.0027356173,0.003538853,0.004001462,0.01087234,0.007316822,0.014331659,0.01174512],"category_scores_gemma":[0.44558546,0.0021978845,0.0028943948,0.0019987538,0.011924283,0.023578612,0.009292037,0.02860568,0.001358634],"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":[0.0022470856,0.0005397533,0.01301483,0.0007117979,0.00078342215,0.003400479,0.009869941,0.009292648,0.005089706,0.8564967,0.0075997957,0.090953834],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00016817942,0.00011818509,0.0016883163,0.00020235339,0.00019850368,0.00045786676,0.0007729952,0.029909173,0.0018540095,0.96251476,0.002037731,0.00007795007],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0019616382,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002140787,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.061388917,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0025341446,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0066386284,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.32465953},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99691087,0.00010980365,0.000017544891,0.00051579723,0.000020921068,0.000018541563,0.00004206698,0.0000013620838,0.0023629966],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99868125,0.00014299921,0.00003420845,0.000110044704,0.000010161658,0.000007746071,0.00004379932,0.0000026182302,0.0009671452],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9969029,0.0007172205,0.00014531791,0.00016219704,0.0011540966,0.00091827114],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9877127,0.0023963107,0.001926667,0.00018628869,0.0041777017,0.0036004046],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003517186,0.0002639601,0.00046463695,0.001149392,0.008391064,0.003692455,0.0010363883,0.0014106352,0.005475633],"category_scores_gemma":[0.025956178,0.0003478397,0.00056057423,0.0009256195,0.0023935374,0.00094922615,0.0018649101,0.0021629783,0.0004023692],"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":[0.0020004604,0.0007928316,0.8470274,0.00007982882,0.00009846963,0.0008544219,0.11760836,0.00030024638,0.0015137778,0.0010176223,0.0054054097,0.023301212],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000028773853,0.00018879076,0.9162051,0.0000650113,0.00003679814,0.00009148062,0.08027205,0.0002150616,0.00017163302,0.00019238456,0.002458336,0.00007456426],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9398907,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9675483,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.060109317,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.017877541,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.028963203,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.12971127},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9244807,0.000990875,0.0019646005,0.0080484655,0.00066838536,0.0010931615,0.00065404363,0.00012002692,0.061979763],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9842444,0.00044798935,0.0024671806,0.0014003954,0.00010381385,0.00029154934,0.00028566114,0.000048285936,0.0107107],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98243606,0.0049119494,0.001327026,0.000964623,0.007561466,0.002798906],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.84391195,0.10486237,0.008802703,0.0035030213,0.035705525,0.003214472],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03136991,0.00054096826,0.00083613454,0.002337152,0.011548729,0.005135914,0.0022862724,0.0034291428,0.010237415],"category_scores_gemma":[0.27517983,0.0007143629,0.00060254475,0.002045211,0.00310863,0.0017516554,0.0025407618,0.0043419655,0.0016154897],"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":[0.0074979714,0.0023381093,0.18941076,0.0012791553,0.00033624028,0.0009877506,0.17880054,0.010182878,0.008183294,0.04309411,0.18136016,0.37652913],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006817897,0.0010544742,0.7817922,0.0017157538,0.0005288077,0.00010391373,0.066377714,0.010171133,0.007620097,0.017917015,0.11133708,0.0006999586],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.91147906,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9554798,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.088520944,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.040034786,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.10812627,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.29047406},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9980172,0.000083970066,0.0006849282,0.000121312274,0.00001727817,0.000049918628,0.000025377074,0.000008389175,0.0009916457],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9985644,0.000027831311,0.0011122114,0.00004291504,0.000010381974,0.000043434993,0.000038927858,0.000008287499,0.00015161313],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9853371,0.010797722,0.00098025,0.00071447785,0.0016731161,0.00049744535],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7408993,0.2329519,0.014165799,0.0046284324,0.0043807975,0.0029738217],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.031032618,0.0002862623,0.00087535253,0.0011228257,0.0014958725,0.0036890882,0.0010600802,0.0014113561,0.0038574336],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2879999,0.00046571708,0.0004975148,0.00047890216,0.001187423,0.0015765708,0.001718752,0.0014195646,0.00027922372],"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":[0.062400576,0.0071393414,0.7200839,0.0006909999,0.0017508527,0.0020324613,0.033636473,0.014768617,0.021062272,0.012714975,0.0040196828,0.119699806],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002305529,0.0064382404,0.87416154,0.0005221955,0.0013091206,0.0014755344,0.016562812,0.052777626,0.010039811,0.030676445,0.0032771162,0.00045390075],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0014960548,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0027227767,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.031032618,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0008161779,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0021725872,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16411817},"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":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.114894666,0.03318413,0.64208573,0.112319715,0.003009059,0.0011711997,0.00020874063,0.00052971405,0.092597015],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6415347,0.006535327,0.33390614,0.011843946,0.001417638,0.00044143543,0.00011805377,0.00007953628,0.004123257],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.7469301,0.13406844,0.030493965,0.01201385,0.07001437,0.00647924],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6384654,0.26959026,0.020466147,0.031353284,0.03724327,0.0028815896],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.19071269,0.00088123913,0.0024410866,0.01000636,0.0070242267,0.025992585,0.0051133074,0.012820471,0.0014969996],"category_scores_gemma":[0.36279032,0.0019183545,0.0016750251,0.0054495647,0.020371707,0.023030654,0.015502046,0.014859063,0.0006219177],"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":[0.000106550375,0.0001028107,0.002474151,0.00037641215,0.00010566465,0.00036735437,0.0054319734,0.010525676,0.001059593,0.8488152,0.0027882953,0.12784635],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00018274819,0.00026735172,0.003457188,0.0021656803,0.00023012327,0.00031280261,0.0018834868,0.015116224,0.0036692584,0.90707356,0.06539661,0.00024508315],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.015889471,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.020576693,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.19071269,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012078801,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.026998252,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9979953},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9924039,0.00044763167,0.00022582556,0.0022288864,0.000030742558,0.000010983897,0.000007907949,0.0000046458913,0.0046393527],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.999089,0.00009824462,0.00008914412,0.0003423056,0.000019296316,0.0000052545024,0.0000060682314,0.0000015118743,0.0003491492],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9966378,0.0022955392,0.00011170991,0.00025416948,0.0004664427,0.00023436392],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97258323,0.013984656,0.009341428,0.0011549792,0.0005256228,0.0024100295],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0043412214,0.00021332523,0.00030970477,0.0005116335,0.0015573114,0.0026293972,0.00058697874,0.0016764099,0.0068267155],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04531987,0.00022926701,0.00032005014,0.0002848955,0.004389001,0.0018226252,0.0013904362,0.0016761235,0.0003795394],"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":[0.0029143398,0.0019223042,0.88473165,0.00027352097,0.0003470907,0.0016727706,0.019347705,0.000359742,0.0024604357,0.008749325,0.0034590738,0.073762],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00017773158,0.0014245515,0.9302187,0.00028460423,0.00023787013,0.002381733,0.04592638,0.0015252483,0.0010128662,0.01024711,0.006478112,0.00008507216],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0017399002,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0028591796,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0068267155,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0010619244,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007039155,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.022958815},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0025377846,0.004539036,0.0057783565,0.06464223,0.020836735,0.00010796724,0.00032919936,0.00047123694,0.90075743],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.03269802,0.0029396713,0.0077193696,0.017009618,0.010658944,0.000107441876,0.00048365857,0.00059644773,0.9277868],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99817157,0.0004536753,0.000080603284,0.00012589077,0.0010529663,0.00011535366],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9920432,0.0046895915,0.00020609608,0.00046742894,0.0020790168,0.0005146992],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016155967,0.00046177354,0.00071854354,0.0023669964,0.004737648,0.011294648,0.0007830301,0.0035503625,0.12911242],"category_scores_gemma":[0.016637448,0.00050907594,0.000542185,0.0018130417,0.002322642,0.0060807373,0.0015899847,0.004037786,0.052468665],"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":[0.000022288847,0.000027700902,0.00019170654,0.00006570095,0.0000066020493,0.00005389461,0.00026212173,0.00009789581,0.00014893714,0.047697943,0.9059741,0.04545114],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000010048534,0.000019678972,0.00051916385,0.00020016714,0.00000920752,0.00008203099,0.0008211463,0.0003179086,0.0002889863,0.047121752,0.9505914,0.000018561357],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004188596,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01182952,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.12911242,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0026954468,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0024619035,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4319241},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9953987,0.00009500631,0.000031343567,0.00069462584,0.000023239552,0.000020531455,0.000040320698,0.0000014224036,0.0036947338],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9983577,0.00012579013,0.00007461168,0.00024537434,0.000010768747,0.000008302727,0.00004303832,0.0000035831301,0.0011307523],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99724495,0.00059005205,0.00012027152,0.00018232006,0.0008562769,0.0010060929],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9886535,0.0026151736,0.0023976392,0.00027657216,0.0033847687,0.0026723582],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002953992,0.0002284923,0.00034338053,0.0010430972,0.00732325,0.0036249303,0.0011857479,0.0013079946,0.005661084],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02173768,0.0002880215,0.00047847466,0.0010270708,0.0027851162,0.0011038544,0.0013017098,0.0019394369,0.00045072293],"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":[0.0009698589,0.0007254884,0.8456681,0.000057682417,0.0001357601,0.00061034074,0.12834711,0.00018090534,0.0009680395,0.0011606613,0.0042091887,0.016966825],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000025243584,0.00010042952,0.7569261,0.00010409827,0.00006172985,0.00012287257,0.23841937,0.00024378844,0.0001706597,0.00030033113,0.00345897,0.00006644662],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9159776,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9642483,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0840224,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0102221165,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.023047892,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16903442},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.86372733,0.0039074533,0.0024291321,0.006893714,0.00013810379,0.00014779906,0.000056177858,0.000041225747,0.12265899],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9963356,0.0004499725,0.00020644609,0.00022870052,0.000030302244,0.000012306403,0.000007863422,0.0000036049398,0.0027252417],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9890471,0.0058859843,0.00039492498,0.00055938977,0.0028473309,0.0012652159],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98255056,0.010968817,0.0031342877,0.0007737125,0.0011586276,0.001413958],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004767139,0.00018342341,0.00030304736,0.0013424462,0.004985022,0.0055312286,0.00063363975,0.0011432301,0.004858102],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02963248,0.00021907766,0.00017640674,0.0007472596,0.0049524815,0.0019555665,0.0030493087,0.0014049856,0.0005553317],"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":[0.00048319076,0.0004333876,0.12985472,0.00058594585,0.00013010306,0.008750657,0.326815,0.000992497,0.0063401363,0.21208043,0.016002081,0.2975319],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001386961,0.00075293327,0.32611337,0.0020366388,0.00013373728,0.0051598856,0.32651147,0.0033526148,0.0066093947,0.13582712,0.19309548,0.00026859876],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.022624511,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03623002,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.022624511,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0039237924,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0056156707,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.044985652},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0005761114,0.00049165485,0.00070987165,0.00065972144,0.00047387596,0.000051046747,0.0009232967,0.00062649656,0.99548787],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0028421169,0.00024029467,0.0004567567,0.00035348762,0.00005699688,0.00002609669,0.0004920941,0.00017031045,0.995362],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99956065,0.00006038555,0.000030208776,0.00013022014,0.00015298401,0.00006542462],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99944276,0.000111355606,0.00003141939,0.00009802303,0.00015801065,0.00015845761],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005852936,0.0008792765,0.00052761944,0.00141768,0.001246733,0.0031050486,0.0010374009,0.0022268943,0.9584849],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010313194,0.0002885041,0.00034207586,0.0013116985,0.0010177438,0.0017103693,0.0024427418,0.0012434247,0.94329846],"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":[0.00016380037,0.0001302392,0.0006593845,0.00054757606,0.0000111105865,0.0003134154,0.00019856438,0.00018331342,0.0020272455,0.018897079,0.3848416,0.5920267],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000014714212,0.00001733482,0.00039375303,0.00013660609,0.0000026054092,0.00015553857,0.00009007317,0.00011824256,0.00025209325,0.0013519948,0.9974597,0.0000073183837],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0021053534,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0027429839,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.041515112,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0011068207,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00073273096,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0592162},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9581292,0.0009141986,0.004492841,0.001366155,0.00013305209,0.00016802478,0.00016972775,0.000019326655,0.034607444],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99676776,0.00025482473,0.0015062143,0.00034929003,0.000051838517,0.00008484543,0.000055319444,0.000008232034,0.0009217508],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.97227424,0.013707798,0.0017094156,0.0014726116,0.010012335,0.00082348735],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.90966266,0.046824235,0.030742658,0.00600912,0.005194512,0.001566788],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.018135771,0.00046059137,0.000745237,0.0018443009,0.0013483892,0.002514991,0.00051124813,0.0010312417,0.0071243085],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1034086,0.00027218525,0.0006353184,0.00086423475,0.0024252129,0.0012390557,0.0021790774,0.0012455443,0.0005149092],"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":[0.0035552606,0.0018497366,0.71885365,0.0011031259,0.0017714448,0.0007475582,0.023447607,0.004067265,0.021263592,0.035140615,0.005280066,0.18292019],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012581672,0.001087211,0.9503969,0.00036247572,0.00021702226,0.000571621,0.0072437506,0.0033892468,0.004882412,0.026025336,0.0055647152,0.0001334881],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015977222,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0026593464,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.018135771,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012444953,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009731863,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09591228},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.02327281,0.00243387,0.0039968523,0.7639922,0.018738473,0.000032931166,0.00013942638,0.00011923291,0.18727428],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.35894483,0.0016638082,0.0041408255,0.2399361,0.009706494,0.000101296944,0.00016473325,0.00036745062,0.38497448],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99199957,0.0028793903,0.00026848633,0.0008133924,0.002455072,0.0015841731],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9798345,0.015647551,0.00047272284,0.00068785035,0.0018606111,0.0014967792],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009397561,0.00052445935,0.000680795,0.00081118924,0.011698179,0.011227534,0.001156685,0.012179398,0.012421023],"category_scores_gemma":[0.055536117,0.0003304421,0.00064513227,0.00077199546,0.0070484807,0.0045063985,0.0028103255,0.02230629,0.0038708632],"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":[0.0001439321,0.00006219658,0.0010630403,0.000038713875,0.00006504795,0.0014320966,0.008859325,0.000309468,0.0003567314,0.3022809,0.65725094,0.028137587],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000031311334,0.000045709952,0.0011585886,0.00014163126,0.000025512512,0.00047422145,0.009513504,0.00041328184,0.0009117837,0.09220174,0.8949986,0.000084056956],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0068328283,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.020584796,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.99316716,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0042086677,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003832629,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.049699664},"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":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.004541513,0.99128914,0.00055809884,0.0003448294,0.00019890632,0.0020605503,0.00040560987,0.000014647192,0.0005867339],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.047187578,0.9448758,0.002959199,0.00082449557,0.00011586466,0.0034117794,0.00041971507,0.000012177297,0.0001934461],"study_design_codex":"systematic_review","study_design_gemma":"systematic_review","domain_scores_codex":[0.96583945,0.016478626,0.011782214,0.001335287,0.0041178633,0.0004466234],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8388596,0.13883501,0.012305919,0.0024008434,0.0069786385,0.00062004075],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.032379005,0.0013834278,0.0074912515,0.010190299,0.0013149612,0.003947028,0.0021707355,0.0027598054,0.004660305],"category_scores_gemma":[0.15646628,0.0014601842,0.007881795,0.008500031,0.0019541383,0.0030983298,0.0019134015,0.0017929563,0.000402495],"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":[0.0004547801,0.00005744714,0.00063182786,0.95255405,0.007206081,0.00010568172,0.0005554105,0.0000718978,0.00017598651,0.0002851043,0.0005400019,0.037361808],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005168685,0.00062176306,0.0036282148,0.94633895,0.036661666,0.00027897087,0.00094619446,0.00006371159,0.00029711335,0.0004175779,0.010176765,0.000052114174],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007836905,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.025165297,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.032379005,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005797781,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.022725912,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1712386},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3556722,0.0017904671,0.27962393,0.050986767,0.00038609668,0.00090528536,0.000271529,0.0006769942,0.30968675],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9467395,0.00023349331,0.050022878,0.0010054602,0.000074988435,0.00014939126,0.000055142402,0.00005043607,0.0016688105],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.8435577,0.100732476,0.008816345,0.005785797,0.03657102,0.0045366124],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7720767,0.14568277,0.024541777,0.014707507,0.039814465,0.0031767944],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.09843392,0.00083343085,0.0007810795,0.011209286,0.007394777,0.02621988,0.0029512781,0.003309186,0.0046695685],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2185852,0.0007498115,0.00077944,0.005791251,0.018993592,0.014630043,0.012190136,0.0051342915,0.0005773712],"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":[0.0000783688,0.0002811531,0.047450658,0.00042773044,0.000112052236,0.00024909474,0.046155103,0.008783275,0.0010933052,0.6798815,0.009854523,0.20563327],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004399552,0.00028541865,0.035856016,0.0025421479,0.00012345734,0.00025934383,0.049619995,0.024393516,0.0030525913,0.7971075,0.08640153,0.00031446273],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008443982,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.014532274,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9926052,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012793216,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.020324292,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.52057457},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6699953,0.020705055,0.014881156,0.24626791,0.001169183,0.0010985415,0.000054508364,0.000050692917,0.045777652],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9649755,0.004524303,0.012143466,0.012510351,0.00017330787,0.00048218563,0.0000147161845,0.00001617472,0.005160013],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9848395,0.012073492,0.0007394404,0.00050167274,0.00074230443,0.0011035848],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94098973,0.048659235,0.004439248,0.0014328145,0.0015393121,0.0029397511],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02732253,0.00025101012,0.00029407712,0.00087030814,0.009633438,0.0052131177,0.001971039,0.005327779,0.004902304],"category_scores_gemma":[0.055053785,0.00064226176,0.00023816967,0.0006102276,0.009735695,0.0048182323,0.00793362,0.005219982,0.0004556298],"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":[0.00035369582,0.00040720968,0.022344315,0.0030672401,0.000045899345,0.023534508,0.5420472,0.0011235789,0.006371843,0.19541588,0.017893117,0.18739545],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00017593674,0.0008514653,0.023178725,0.008884037,0.00007076521,0.0068865637,0.76218015,0.0011368287,0.0028305908,0.07043652,0.12323283,0.00013557247],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00604353,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.028035564,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02732253,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0035129387,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.017116945,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1444971},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0007342227,0.003456845,0.00040683738,0.0034112157,0.00052068604,0.000032357442,0.0038585393,0.00028241661,0.98729694],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.003723902,0.0017858293,0.00048866554,0.00089213246,0.00003522093,0.000010931744,0.0011389082,0.00010179858,0.99182254],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9995053,0.00001918111,0.000011289119,0.00010125415,0.0002445442,0.00011840722],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99927706,0.00003677684,0.00001744886,0.000034530658,0.00047094424,0.0001633162],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00023781978,0.0006271411,0.00041226388,0.0012618564,0.007059225,0.00530558,0.001040717,0.0015511187,0.35171652],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00089585205,0.0003351625,0.00033668292,0.0027759324,0.0008891938,0.0013991225,0.0011393847,0.0013780108,0.102909565],"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":[0.00001993665,0.000011278945,0.00043597503,0.00013324726,0.000003847934,0.000185984,0.00027525687,0.0001038091,0.00018718562,0.063495494,0.86860925,0.06653882],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000014597239,0.0000011184845,0.00025204913,0.000028678118,0.0000011492916,0.000032433993,0.00007590083,0.000027443622,0.000035027093,0.00075965363,0.9987822,0.000002986351],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.91423917,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9722631,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.35171652,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.030646805,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04125585,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.10853854,0.032886345,0.04024678,0.49121958,0.0015261242,0.00016070686,0.00016204717,0.0000485155,0.32521138],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97283924,0.0039051266,0.0054948977,0.01152237,0.0011589767,0.000113654,0.000021907663,0.000020927975,0.0049228664],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9537682,0.031479716,0.001958363,0.00205705,0.008611203,0.0021255359],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.60653144,0.36441636,0.012595066,0.004343937,0.008652184,0.0034608985],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.064395994,0.00061523524,0.0015850577,0.004817128,0.005124835,0.01711153,0.0013774426,0.014872268,0.009205963],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1958998,0.00078096444,0.0007403656,0.0026827317,0.033471018,0.011763001,0.0055339755,0.0095951855,0.00064373255],"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":[0.00015801548,0.000090113965,0.0034144057,0.00020597532,0.000092668386,0.0002500083,0.002459208,0.0012789348,0.00017729666,0.96004456,0.0069046807,0.024924096],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000034772445,0.000029400508,0.0015240307,0.00018240373,0.000021213502,0.000063637315,0.0011562507,0.0009795821,0.00009275791,0.98784196,0.0080442745,0.000029787327],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0038880722,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005270816,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.064395994,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0068018343,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00931362,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.34056264},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0005697251,0.0027313023,0.00055671507,0.022141974,0.0044299834,0.000043653854,0.00019051913,0.00016029006,0.9691759],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.008360335,0.0013134958,0.00034765378,0.014652022,0.0013664168,0.000048282964,0.00015565642,0.00014626041,0.97360975],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99694544,0.00047237036,0.000111711255,0.0005478121,0.0011116081,0.00081107643],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985459,0.00024326396,0.00008165608,0.0003265807,0.00046027618,0.00034233785],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0015778682,0.0006624783,0.00061616534,0.00122599,0.0075856294,0.007833607,0.001213484,0.004380269,0.3047706],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0069660153,0.00034891747,0.00064935436,0.0009754628,0.00264995,0.006377951,0.006000435,0.005890672,0.1679785],"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":[0.000012034611,0.000021244752,0.00020957681,0.00006123073,0.000004569492,0.00012968185,0.0013036453,0.00002015272,0.00012223051,0.1730946,0.773537,0.05148395],"study_design_scores_gemma":[9.955352e-7,0.0000026940425,0.00007314243,0.00003921011,6.533108e-7,0.000052722433,0.00023108927,0.0000051133497,0.000011827781,0.0029023802,0.99667823,0.0000019764398],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006451506,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.016449371,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3047706,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0024700158,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004137055,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99166036},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00804676,0.005623102,0.009142466,0.10640667,0.01747593,0.0016703369,0.0037860207,0.0013206523,0.84652805],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.063444644,0.0019357607,0.0178663,0.11670044,0.0023449415,0.0016536986,0.0016960338,0.00034493543,0.7940132],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.97259086,0.0068911486,0.0033418813,0.0017061393,0.012851042,0.0026189832],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9706208,0.009393498,0.001868195,0.0030798628,0.012560968,0.002476661],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016086103,0.0012143789,0.0009863685,0.0017806514,0.012220392,0.006570312,0.0023107578,0.02047518,0.01732806],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05299187,0.0015784649,0.001185408,0.0013582575,0.008298247,0.0022452243,0.004404,0.015504559,0.019862218],"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":[0.00010951635,0.000096342425,0.0012869218,0.00017052064,0.000022995691,0.00018002173,0.0029393209,0.00023752559,0.0013199686,0.13079835,0.8311006,0.031738006],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006332496,0.000054421005,0.0053662835,0.00031719057,0.000037518006,0.0001545598,0.0008041419,0.00016278688,0.00055324635,0.0053734872,0.98701364,0.00009942491],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.35215777,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5785276,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6478422,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009690832,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0564203,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.70021594},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0008343147,0.0404015,0.00017905117,0.0068186247,0.0059401058,0.000017637454,0.0018278928,0.00013128216,0.9438495],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0030987961,0.00727353,0.00007639285,0.0005144255,0.00044497655,0.000008291111,0.0003254761,0.00006363242,0.9881946],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9998222,0.00001835372,0.000011244049,0.000051618066,0.00006810856,0.00002858188],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9998473,0.000026719135,0.000015224408,0.000020507068,0.0000559643,0.000034172794],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00022140627,0.00074704917,0.0003655379,0.0010058508,0.002052745,0.0034656806,0.000509249,0.0009390962,0.24311113],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00078729785,0.00036945505,0.0002275366,0.0017480813,0.0009071541,0.002815953,0.0013753474,0.002006921,0.13009226],"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":[0.000034010805,0.000008767028,0.00033101143,0.00013017512,0.000003934822,0.00011891413,0.00044769273,0.000041073563,0.00011960015,0.028867444,0.91993463,0.049962826],"study_design_scores_gemma":[8.575078e-7,0.0000015540068,0.0002632712,0.000051765586,4.7437806e-7,0.000022747214,0.00006915423,0.0000053505278,0.000013176031,0.0003779045,0.99919254,0.0000012217586],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0139652295,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.056290414,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.75688887,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0018053495,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012731198,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.81328773},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.071450904,0.013673467,0.23222226,0.34455013,0.0024650022,0.000711602,0.00028863628,0.00013297056,0.33450502],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.89962304,0.004346328,0.0565195,0.026698839,0.0010084012,0.00040071132,0.00011853705,0.00009690724,0.011187711],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.86794335,0.056581125,0.005224293,0.008787246,0.054093953,0.007370108],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7826555,0.17488652,0.010212444,0.008797297,0.019720837,0.0037273914],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.09666394,0.00086083217,0.0018050513,0.010598513,0.018639011,0.03085855,0.006592807,0.012865328,0.005512039],"category_scores_gemma":[0.22888356,0.0013207921,0.0010177647,0.0058020838,0.07954323,0.02325435,0.016602658,0.015726065,0.0009772037],"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":[0.00002425383,0.000019110137,0.001419141,0.00013791486,0.000018331268,0.00024210765,0.0105008725,0.00031312418,0.00008879198,0.9676595,0.0028310504,0.016745871],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000058576705,0.000048231883,0.003930032,0.0014756465,0.000046560763,0.00014735061,0.0146731725,0.00251912,0.00047963022,0.90435064,0.072175704,0.00009537954],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.21094267,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.23161945,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.21094267,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.033592105,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0583652,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5112139},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00066567544,0.000023443745,0.000787086,0.0002668602,0.000056010278,0.00036320652,0.9957585,0.00019680453,0.0018824064],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.054584324,0.00028624298,0.014854355,0.0021069804,0.00043418282,0.017164065,0.87124455,0.0021071522,0.037218235],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977168,0.00082149915,0.00039309202,0.00042078967,0.000422881,0.00022490109],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.85372907,0.12873164,0.0043888525,0.0053349743,0.006514678,0.0013007865],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005217618,0.0011135553,0.0013065588,0.002508547,0.0013473822,0.0018458719,0.0026304377,0.0015341092,0.900856],"category_scores_gemma":[0.14199401,0.00081074296,0.0012874146,0.00340087,0.00048868184,0.0022303786,0.0012653972,0.0014915294,0.11423662],"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":[0.00051260146,0.00012926561,0.0055697258,0.0017985426,0.00008281548,0.00010870028,0.0001576099,0.00041113998,0.000034908822,0.0017475516,0.9809265,0.008520624],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.019307937,0.0010723739,0.11149513,0.010983786,0.0009182746,0.0017662331,0.0022125817,0.0067732246,0.0010486684,0.045392063,0.7986045,0.00042526738],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011329206,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.014145762,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.900856,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001089866,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002576566,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14141679},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.050277553,0.024918146,0.0037165773,0.07447578,0.0034632052,0.00069378206,0.0028546317,0.00026364834,0.8393368],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.61631435,0.029415455,0.011731854,0.020447161,0.0010976935,0.00062704156,0.0022113188,0.00017120574,0.31798393],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99006736,0.0012336582,0.0003569419,0.0008979391,0.005736029,0.001708129],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9873875,0.0011045955,0.00036029055,0.00030626843,0.008525451,0.002315951],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005850601,0.00052064034,0.0005607701,0.005443851,0.017230185,0.0061822576,0.0023323095,0.0025194043,0.021541765],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023605326,0.0005321527,0.0006429526,0.003725432,0.002977107,0.0012972474,0.0032526413,0.0023447236,0.0025733807],"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":[0.00016043821,0.000061116094,0.01770388,0.0004293377,0.000054039847,0.0006269216,0.004652765,0.00080726465,0.00067510305,0.16113433,0.55348605,0.26020885],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000047176814,0.000054568256,0.047711354,0.0005349988,0.0000664438,0.0003014242,0.0035925673,0.000497694,0.000385818,0.007402417,0.9392688,0.00013674595],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9639035,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9863464,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07435142,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.07435142,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.17594604,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5394598},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0034965721,0.005427996,0.00025956417,0.018397259,0.004648617,0.00015647968,0.010342779,0.0002431286,0.9570277],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0030344196,0.000542454,0.00005395377,0.00031477303,0.00009342445,0.0000098480095,0.0005387572,0.000038268256,0.99537414],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.999361,0.000024470824,0.000012318664,0.000096590535,0.00027973184,0.00022600766],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992048,0.000058750968,0.000026299727,0.00003171221,0.0003049837,0.00037349356],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00049075234,0.0006938487,0.0006513306,0.00073572877,0.008010739,0.0036666323,0.00071025634,0.002374414,0.58020294],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000994474,0.0004034183,0.00046224322,0.0011232606,0.00095017574,0.0009933431,0.0016514387,0.0023801597,0.14612181],"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":[0.000041961535,0.000009624773,0.00036164222,0.00003459802,0.0000034176046,0.00009591918,0.00010858459,0.000041536834,0.00013887041,0.0021534213,0.98796344,0.009046982],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000006827559,0.0000077019795,0.0029001746,0.000049491042,0.0000024008782,0.000013061287,0.00022045948,0.000032701537,0.000065911605,0.0001470407,0.9965474,0.000006698497],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7231549,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.95751095,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.58020294,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011779137,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01563727,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5987896},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.06916371,0.0029142897,0.34529093,0.09887214,0.0024701573,0.0008074312,0.0002685357,0.00090153835,0.4793113],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8705299,0.0008498673,0.083679594,0.026615951,0.00040752278,0.0005286305,0.00009856608,0.0003279666,0.016961949],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.8097668,0.095104866,0.006426151,0.010108299,0.072512,0.0060818717],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8807372,0.06257268,0.012849636,0.013502239,0.027399737,0.0029384482],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.11198136,0.00081259233,0.00074828713,0.0040595806,0.012286873,0.01077937,0.0034552834,0.004891151,0.0032972249],"category_scores_gemma":[0.17787571,0.0011528872,0.000934996,0.0022925036,0.036001354,0.0073957155,0.008967252,0.012366651,0.0016563343],"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":[0.0000965368,0.000043999353,0.0028748878,0.00029674917,0.000072140385,0.00037740183,0.066913396,0.00061442953,0.002645149,0.8371458,0.03277393,0.056145553],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013448778,0.00008698301,0.0073173875,0.0011831956,0.00010745496,0.000995795,0.025389865,0.0051632496,0.006156087,0.6802413,0.27293417,0.00028994447],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.18158285,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2658798,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.18158285,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.019637339,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.031983767,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.59222114},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0010852865,0.09059067,0.022851909,0.057304744,0.017598493,0.0029881166,0.032895587,0.001711067,0.772974],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.014159876,0.11341025,0.06601343,0.029327674,0.004009932,0.0022120757,0.030130628,0.0016300677,0.7391061],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99460584,0.0004572959,0.00057682354,0.00033194426,0.0037347295,0.00029340977],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9837335,0.002758401,0.00046031698,0.00056865986,0.01166406,0.0008151801],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005407126,0.0016558251,0.0009002704,0.010362992,0.0047336253,0.008017904,0.0034236216,0.0040254,0.06852346],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023144256,0.001341756,0.0009309757,0.008589679,0.0032536958,0.004516305,0.0026265276,0.004674482,0.026839206],"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":[0.000003956215,0.000007320053,0.00005854677,0.00016027204,0.0000013671466,0.000052575815,0.00014396786,0.00016670043,0.00006342526,0.011175936,0.95791125,0.030254582],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000017306565,0.0000018312911,0.00019458239,0.00025995125,0.0000014292405,0.00006305513,0.00007009825,0.000041612002,0.000022476244,0.002400042,0.99693394,0.000009243403],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.61593884,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7457405,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.38406116,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03245484,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.08506223,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.77264595},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9851913,0.00025514973,0.00011401593,0.0019509055,0.000010445257,0.00005963263,0.00011836439,0.0000026268226,0.012297549],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99774677,0.00019148797,0.0002481044,0.0001250282,0.0000056048175,0.000019459872,0.000062281455,0.0000017888277,0.0015994355],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9884261,0.0047584395,0.00032490626,0.00042313494,0.0042146947,0.0018528983],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.93678635,0.03164471,0.010034911,0.001543908,0.014123846,0.005866302],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012608999,0.00022476584,0.00044987086,0.0023760793,0.004421513,0.0042292913,0.0014812294,0.00072882406,0.002320867],"category_scores_gemma":[0.083243184,0.00020259175,0.000289216,0.0032429087,0.0031138803,0.0009860246,0.0022276149,0.001558924,0.00026300602],"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":[0.00029430073,0.00044674546,0.9001683,0.00014776242,0.00017794863,0.00025929156,0.031213012,0.0020542475,0.0004840431,0.0053344285,0.0030276508,0.056392293],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000012067328,0.00012169614,0.970811,0.00017166327,0.000056228564,0.000037108533,0.024043845,0.00136192,0.00029472902,0.0010075464,0.0020521982,0.00002994947],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9047974,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9649204,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.095202625,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03230393,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04562568,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23438251},"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":"dataset","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"dataset","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0017351118,0.007952445,0.0012512831,0.004278635,0.0032866888,0.00040312737,0.17520629,0.0021765057,0.8037099],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.002886245,0.0027592375,0.001119922,0.0005278148,0.00012878077,0.00014379458,0.042835075,0.00036138648,0.94923776],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9963168,0.00019491477,0.00034145528,0.00025970166,0.0022694115,0.00061765144],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.985878,0.0005742461,0.0003065828,0.00065823796,0.011798203,0.00078474265],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016396585,0.0012798163,0.0015512501,0.017793152,0.007517359,0.011167294,0.0028854308,0.0032725814,0.24244541],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009288772,0.0014889969,0.0006412104,0.022289183,0.0008011325,0.0020738551,0.0017645537,0.0026288496,0.13240743],"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":[0.00001231963,0.000010020699,0.00021882744,0.00010333314,0.000002283911,0.000019139574,0.000034307956,0.000056057095,0.000028021717,0.0023588664,0.97453576,0.022620995],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000061748356,0.000004595554,0.0027577376,0.00017916887,0.000006733018,0.000028213184,0.00009317036,0.000082134386,0.00008201353,0.00066509726,0.99607795,0.000016918622],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.86192185,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.94091886,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.24244541,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.024704237,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.07222461,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.81106067},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11877046,0.0067493846,0.0032691066,0.69307196,0.0028788876,0.0003784825,0.00051973003,0.00015925283,0.17420276],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6471112,0.0031659629,0.0046059615,0.20392333,0.000431743,0.0001338548,0.00023200561,0.00013595857,0.14026009],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.97861767,0.0048886864,0.0006883737,0.0021523365,0.0067102653,0.0069426047],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9372608,0.02416517,0.0019538417,0.0016957175,0.021389073,0.013535417],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.024590624,0.00047026126,0.0009898914,0.0031102959,0.050243095,0.019788811,0.0038441978,0.010969645,0.014054863],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07036691,0.000960287,0.0007137036,0.0039003005,0.014302517,0.0049153944,0.0065351124,0.019622115,0.0012100801],"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":[0.00019631608,0.00018894915,0.03329359,0.00015396773,0.00009836903,0.00074861443,0.03400495,0.0013409106,0.0005375366,0.4341374,0.40862006,0.08667931],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002089133,0.00019969238,0.045240067,0.0009919488,0.00017082664,0.00017774038,0.114341244,0.0022728422,0.0019506179,0.09016149,0.74391526,0.00036930785],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9740956,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9929091,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.11999186,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.11999186,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.38108575,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.87060595},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.26643276,0.012387377,0.19090866,0.088323735,0.0009016615,0.00021144025,0.00018268629,0.00009430571,0.44055733],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9886165,0.0010838986,0.0025668556,0.0012348817,0.00027073664,0.000053285126,0.000010257081,0.000011766668,0.0061519407],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9941836,0.0025777074,0.00036787998,0.00065635884,0.0015219016,0.00069255795],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9783595,0.016731124,0.002062194,0.0015516785,0.0008870787,0.00040833742],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0070208185,0.00029799,0.0005932203,0.0007946001,0.0026408012,0.0069684433,0.001404013,0.0037150083,0.004389587],"category_scores_gemma":[0.020310624,0.00029931913,0.00062665687,0.0006996348,0.032167874,0.0056134905,0.0058082705,0.0034888878,0.000482945],"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":[0.000019960791,0.000009386436,0.0014036098,0.00005434207,0.0000077363065,0.00013895922,0.0036247952,0.0004386113,0.00025781879,0.986053,0.00068805093,0.007303743],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000012936298,0.000086030166,0.0037931548,0.00020510382,0.00003139965,0.00038307405,0.003136938,0.0026719898,0.0009964439,0.9645607,0.02409387,0.000028361623],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0065377536,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0043867226,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0070208185,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0035466417,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00343739,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.037130058},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00075633277,0.08679118,0.0050565833,0.7352198,0.002323903,0.000117875854,0.00045993537,0.000042202155,0.16923213],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.32829034,0.26198822,0.03420124,0.3177476,0.012690476,0.0005293531,0.00061206025,0.00039052716,0.04355026],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.873855,0.050958816,0.009377679,0.007925013,0.050356004,0.0075274194],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.64943826,0.25049126,0.006049168,0.006550916,0.07790453,0.009565884],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.107912004,0.0016448653,0.0044221366,0.032443397,0.018633435,0.032902434,0.008669811,0.026578447,0.012514525],"category_scores_gemma":[0.30115288,0.0022103798,0.0022820442,0.022350742,0.06772535,0.017988821,0.008619821,0.02528781,0.0016021659],"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":[0.000038296588,0.000019946645,0.0006060328,0.0010848744,0.00008653073,0.00026482268,0.0021732496,0.0007579988,0.000106550804,0.86135465,0.10021366,0.033293422],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000076409575,0.000022781715,0.0018879306,0.006861274,0.00016854903,0.00026287834,0.0025156243,0.0010172434,0.00018086602,0.62422,0.3626204,0.00016597436],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9110625,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8988774,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.19976908,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.19976908,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.32441592,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.92815447},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.91474116,0.0019588862,0.000706639,0.047825884,0.00030253304,0.000072384115,0.000657172,0.00002075187,0.03371466],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99303776,0.0006902723,0.00034107993,0.0019175586,0.00004813616,0.000010548629,0.00018351848,0.000014573081,0.003756448],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9888244,0.0018018204,0.00046478154,0.0010084612,0.0044887722,0.0034118],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95715785,0.011850172,0.005552766,0.00072094117,0.019703696,0.0050145765],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.011780029,0.00023625878,0.00053050474,0.002394903,0.012520383,0.00867889,0.0023992495,0.0032739234,0.0034464218],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06747462,0.00042679903,0.00047638893,0.003822711,0.0063276114,0.0024164026,0.0025705905,0.007166862,0.0002769716],"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":[0.0010953133,0.00047469576,0.6103298,0.00037687932,0.00043550483,0.0006878059,0.074200094,0.009064961,0.0007780301,0.06996274,0.08862306,0.14397101],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000062474464,0.0000746382,0.8961849,0.0003333845,0.00011732276,0.00010816063,0.042861853,0.004157224,0.00058224576,0.006726641,0.048589736,0.00020146435],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9955397,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9988431,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.13389787,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.13389787,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.2590739,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9715016},"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":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0029955597,0.0014749091,0.008256725,0.94333136,0.0017168847,0.00004396065,0.000075993776,0.00014657197,0.04195807],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.19107996,0.004379825,0.058172457,0.6164893,0.0029453551,0.00018866187,0.0002998184,0.00046823267,0.1259764],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9840576,0.0056471145,0.0005963276,0.0013066721,0.005878525,0.002513726],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.94946307,0.021617647,0.0031693298,0.004033116,0.0136089455,0.008107989],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02750206,0.00063473586,0.0005133115,0.0013069902,0.009751034,0.015445068,0.0019404349,0.0133179715,0.022096178],"category_scores_gemma":[0.059692644,0.0007716307,0.0011510053,0.0008369372,0.02567398,0.019330427,0.0043590222,0.026199987,0.0077000326],"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":[0.000063782136,0.00016308244,0.004107334,0.00015209336,0.000037656057,0.00026185488,0.01073797,0.0004486036,0.0008960429,0.36099258,0.55827045,0.0638685],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008244389,0.00007595355,0.0034426542,0.00036608317,0.000028976288,0.00020389573,0.017114487,0.0008225807,0.0008469733,0.16807397,0.80877286,0.00016917918],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07963712,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.14823589,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07963712,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011731712,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.027353253,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.15834713},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.006305119,0.029622527,0.0007313787,0.5903876,0.16564088,0.0027539944,0.014477356,0.00017666456,0.18990462],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.08814337,0.028514158,0.0033226677,0.21255676,0.043424096,0.0046253074,0.005798122,0.0003063799,0.61330914],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9929837,0.0008890921,0.001079032,0.0006557317,0.0033914268,0.0010010574],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9342459,0.005303936,0.0023127268,0.0011189014,0.053225018,0.0037935898],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0052772877,0.000733898,0.0018471243,0.0025119223,0.005040837,0.004141838,0.0027654069,0.012809975,0.08696448],"category_scores_gemma":[0.054819666,0.00065004383,0.0016267069,0.0048287846,0.0017715608,0.0019166049,0.0017049188,0.0062370873,0.020500764],"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":[0.00008733741,0.000006659781,0.00032766355,0.0004383053,0.000014541751,0.00024150351,0.00025444926,0.00002435199,0.00015302954,0.0008033464,0.9889193,0.008729575],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008517289,0.000013703446,0.004651236,0.0023694884,0.000045547175,0.00019391243,0.0016767228,0.00013384724,0.00015751188,0.0006768673,0.98995847,0.00003763296],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3592808,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5097679,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6407192,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.015669744,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04102819,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7143791},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5869568,0.022261867,0.001457796,0.17978051,0.002009058,0.00022719335,0.00090587296,0.00012321252,0.20627768],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9463157,0.009882713,0.00053054467,0.012896952,0.00015908705,0.000032390915,0.00014909201,0.00006574807,0.029967735],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9904529,0.0013079481,0.00021958526,0.00059367745,0.003680717,0.0037450963],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9874248,0.0022254284,0.00050645584,0.00030195,0.0041563227,0.005385015],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0036508297,0.00047105242,0.00079591037,0.002148344,0.05468442,0.011546841,0.0024664656,0.004258787,0.006841011],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009674464,0.00051993463,0.00054622337,0.008606743,0.013797012,0.003280082,0.0071053742,0.006753883,0.0003628994],"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":[0.00018174846,0.0002814006,0.03890969,0.00054943166,0.000061660954,0.013052829,0.6350882,0.0007278367,0.0012989672,0.106572226,0.0959922,0.10728376],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000018075623,0.00008558281,0.03743034,0.00049742113,0.000040468818,0.0018480697,0.39905787,0.00045390942,0.0003470192,0.0032331422,0.5567813,0.00020685294],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9963098,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9981926,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.16890451,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.16890451,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.3184849,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.96395296},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.010874289,0.0016704125,0.0009969791,0.06321651,0.0015090848,0.00036600343,0.0016719552,0.00036999985,0.9193248],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0829782,0.0006678561,0.00157021,0.06338694,0.00031052405,0.00024049208,0.0005735879,0.00016447563,0.8501077],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9964635,0.00018613758,0.00009294793,0.0003109228,0.0014901198,0.0014564802],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9979042,0.00038529886,0.00008046697,0.00011246121,0.0010329618,0.00048468684],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020276448,0.00050147105,0.00034826229,0.0010098164,0.013921199,0.0054793055,0.001798209,0.009106285,0.04732731],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004482174,0.0005886461,0.00076536485,0.0008787354,0.002771179,0.0011076529,0.0013808097,0.0059196884,0.011146122],"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":[0.00017518486,0.000054082553,0.003939249,0.00014585865,0.000025045956,0.0015455654,0.0011985003,0.00025557913,0.002425258,0.119757846,0.84921116,0.021266712],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004289725,0.000029945735,0.007519277,0.00007049665,0.000024913452,0.00014367717,0.0006560059,0.0005621001,0.0011591115,0.003583586,0.9861435,0.00006447837],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9080652,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.96954465,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9080652,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.036947206,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.05246204,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.268072},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.011372048,0.0013811637,0.002006106,0.067734264,0.0018180888,0.0004050952,0.0018860654,0.00062402885,0.9127731],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.117754556,0.0005795962,0.0026274738,0.086147115,0.0004149128,0.00034735535,0.00084365986,0.000284589,0.79100066],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9950498,0.0005302548,0.0001669888,0.00045642443,0.0018138654,0.0019826223],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973978,0.00096731266,0.00014212019,0.00016048002,0.0008528155,0.00047943526],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0036811228,0.00047705334,0.00040282204,0.0012333128,0.0114597455,0.00605863,0.0019663544,0.0112041775,0.04895598],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007132388,0.00070513604,0.0007279512,0.0010142714,0.0030017989,0.0015797783,0.0021524273,0.009600448,0.021886177],"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":[0.00015268198,0.000059619848,0.0024460226,0.000098796016,0.000014152408,0.00078980863,0.0011415575,0.00018573909,0.0021827456,0.19530386,0.7761226,0.021502461],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000091140566,0.00007384414,0.007683389,0.00014919261,0.000039444923,0.00019744839,0.0010373545,0.00093767856,0.0031210347,0.0154769495,0.97109276,0.00009968004],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.40665293,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.58181024,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.40665293,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.010923594,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.017333688,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8085719},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.14342377,0.003660532,0.0044411123,0.13637894,0.011051963,0.00023756888,0.0010366522,0.00073911564,0.6990304],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.65330845,0.002135249,0.0029898288,0.023481013,0.006649353,0.00020703075,0.00035765464,0.0004505326,0.3104209],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9940137,0.0015441189,0.0002903979,0.00087494217,0.0022957548,0.000981089],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9878534,0.005751476,0.0014939009,0.000787959,0.001944427,0.0021688258],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0046325093,0.0005369055,0.00036901137,0.0021743495,0.008539767,0.00732151,0.00061903393,0.0034249118,0.031314548],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01704558,0.0006597755,0.00048624663,0.0022467352,0.0015967527,0.0049902447,0.005777592,0.00552186,0.003922829],"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":[0.00031346144,0.00020507215,0.013392205,0.0003358598,0.00010624809,0.011598965,0.021100806,0.000452901,0.0048723123,0.09709125,0.69527864,0.1552523],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000032411077,0.00016166053,0.008206172,0.00019256688,0.00008477409,0.0020421655,0.01317133,0.0005618274,0.0033435149,0.004799766,0.96729237,0.00011144831],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002523699,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008182618,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96868545,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002087678,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0022874954,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10475761},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.06181402,0.057681713,0.044085175,0.3692931,0.002166734,0.00078180525,0.00063890376,0.00008937987,0.46344918],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9422755,0.010960785,0.015084172,0.019908702,0.00086625444,0.00021218914,0.00009619383,0.00005713979,0.0105391],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.91172487,0.037459508,0.0028300292,0.0037625595,0.039125964,0.0050970027],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8214764,0.12659197,0.008707795,0.0037867073,0.03308006,0.006357043],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.064074725,0.0014438845,0.001436839,0.012782068,0.01877856,0.01775032,0.0057477118,0.009599246,0.00657153],"category_scores_gemma":[0.21166277,0.00096712325,0.0015499789,0.0063041104,0.04564308,0.013180482,0.009527537,0.014554538,0.0005203283],"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":[0.00030684922,0.00008244876,0.014328739,0.0006401566,0.000256094,0.0010548229,0.023552606,0.0015345468,0.00030962177,0.85638213,0.023167018,0.07838498],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000245621,0.0001631136,0.03155957,0.0043222266,0.0006760465,0.0009496153,0.028303567,0.0059702243,0.0009679076,0.8221643,0.10420449,0.00047336312],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8067958,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8826262,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.19320422,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.10337777,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.13745697,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7500617},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9987857,0.000041172563,0.000017315007,0.000173893,0.0000024071865,0.0000060294183,0.0000350195,6.041767e-7,0.00093781593],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987305,0.00013563133,0.000055427896,0.00013326255,0.0000037081643,0.000009264652,0.000061289924,0.0000017189054,0.0008692405],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99870896,0.0003410488,0.00007057634,0.00011984414,0.00032206692,0.00043754652],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9930138,0.0025058924,0.0011631276,0.00015685623,0.00181107,0.0013492401],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021716438,0.00012877274,0.0003611897,0.001859608,0.0063354988,0.002753059,0.0006213599,0.0008164225,0.0028916385],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007996898,0.0002283035,0.00028300643,0.0034543884,0.0022534998,0.0013560621,0.0012813879,0.001139921,0.00012352195],"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":[0.00021163972,0.00037421918,0.5763253,0.000056762063,0.00003814941,0.0005676123,0.40800348,0.000048524595,0.00048976217,0.0009864304,0.0011159402,0.011782293],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000070674328,0.000069322,0.47334316,0.000031617838,0.000020147494,0.000054950357,0.52349615,0.00007788859,0.00007282037,0.00006445421,0.0027471548,0.00001519089],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8520762,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9212833,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.14792383,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011196261,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.010448025,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2975899},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8433382,0.0011477784,0.007910567,0.012382272,0.00021137556,0.00007198011,0.000118998934,0.000056934223,0.13476194],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.971329,0.0005572451,0.0011314937,0.000619731,0.000026335314,0.00004772463,0.000045699915,0.000048473503,0.026194321],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9930555,0.00406259,0.00018547568,0.00080472435,0.001020163,0.0008715138],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98580766,0.00685099,0.002927163,0.0014099812,0.002145135,0.000859064],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009408465,0.00039709255,0.00033539024,0.0013610441,0.006689986,0.009318699,0.0010119891,0.0016209184,0.006618718],"category_scores_gemma":[0.032819726,0.00048174866,0.00021026707,0.0014998785,0.013485367,0.007035541,0.004688384,0.0028805933,0.001600328],"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":[0.00006955565,0.00004432511,0.043488476,0.000069314214,0.00001653335,0.00092341466,0.8507781,0.000105639665,0.00080544467,0.078548774,0.0029575827,0.022192864],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000012735936,0.000064496715,0.044158593,0.00029042087,0.000029687917,0.0005927513,0.7944075,0.00043777993,0.0014258466,0.022310264,0.13620451,0.00006550071],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.024353648,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.028236415,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.024353648,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003946295,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0046796366,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0497573},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0038266678,0.094712555,0.0035495574,0.2844256,0.10934497,0.0007876814,0.0014830428,0.00071309996,0.50115687],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.044798438,0.060313553,0.004216846,0.06819137,0.039837737,0.00071507925,0.0014339648,0.0007129234,0.77978015],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9844222,0.0032477102,0.0018721739,0.0012132901,0.0083537055,0.00089098705],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9362823,0.010891584,0.0019031869,0.0028775386,0.044558696,0.0034866263],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016130812,0.00054625823,0.0013621002,0.0036969362,0.007007385,0.0147373695,0.001712908,0.0070511983,0.08204063],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07784402,0.0009721521,0.00087193295,0.0032623922,0.0031244638,0.0032107912,0.0025400901,0.00617841,0.059087288],"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":[0.000017408467,0.000017353237,0.0005866945,0.00014723184,0.000010812802,0.000070939386,0.00016125379,0.000030384917,0.00019827954,0.0075444765,0.95384413,0.03737106],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000060922016,0.0000064412598,0.00084824226,0.00032887352,0.000007667751,0.000040742445,0.00010939427,0.000048942293,0.000039182,0.0013911981,0.997165,0.0000081907865],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.022515407,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05433674,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08204063,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0055803116,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.024257405,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.27445328},"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":"editorial","genre_gemma":"editorial","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"editorial","genre_consensus":"editorial","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00020015091,0.011599811,0.00038313048,0.44869134,0.5087761,0.0002717438,0.0004668413,0.00027427753,0.029336609],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.003252008,0.012020652,0.0010764736,0.5565903,0.2906802,0.0005932725,0.0004339798,0.00032113513,0.13503192],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98858297,0.00148672,0.0011005728,0.0009284507,0.006946788,0.0009544604],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95432246,0.012404517,0.0015812902,0.0018334908,0.027024733,0.002833413],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012664949,0.0019801822,0.0030724807,0.0047640363,0.007412568,0.013894263,0.0077289524,0.030880746,0.040307328],"category_scores_gemma":[0.060994018,0.0020217597,0.003350957,0.0049482863,0.003098717,0.0052892556,0.0021651336,0.02155925,0.04502521],"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":[0.000005627509,0.0000072288763,0.000027782216,0.00006678898,0.0000035117082,0.000031730073,0.0000068218305,0.0000139822505,0.000020085345,0.00043497028,0.9969408,0.0024406],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000023832934,0.000011512495,0.00028413258,0.00040554488,0.000015970503,0.000047741134,0.000027657657,0.00006808673,0.00006122972,0.0009669628,0.9980702,0.000017286076],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01681822,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.043561473,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.040307328,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00974529,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01697505,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.13484138},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.16131788,0.0052110557,0.03234982,0.29434845,0.0033251382,0.00059350015,0.000510711,0.00025666243,0.5020867],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9340693,0.0015859191,0.00891092,0.018964943,0.0005952936,0.00013645027,0.000121188474,0.00014122785,0.03547485],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.92602146,0.029271211,0.0024680067,0.0050968686,0.024139864,0.01300263],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.84471655,0.106614046,0.0056614983,0.0049913377,0.027744085,0.010272362],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.06982988,0.00074360264,0.0015500283,0.004660141,0.03158513,0.022605352,0.0034640243,0.010425799,0.011774946],"category_scores_gemma":[0.29768535,0.0013093238,0.0010235367,0.004290291,0.023995357,0.008133594,0.007951475,0.013095431,0.0011176266],"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":[0.00044987325,0.00020261333,0.031770166,0.00020992498,0.0001899182,0.0007521676,0.054894894,0.003847271,0.00056446716,0.61729383,0.14836916,0.14145584],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013522824,0.00012815723,0.056337662,0.0007030374,0.00020127305,0.0004496162,0.0399392,0.010305873,0.0014117268,0.64083976,0.24881546,0.0007330444],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8762473,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9082922,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.12375271,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.057910465,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.19026372,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4201718},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0924142,0.004506181,0.0077082603,0.027980177,0.00065346103,0.00006881513,0.00030316683,0.0000983532,0.86626726],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.68485993,0.0014997631,0.0015613944,0.0020448233,0.00007642728,0.00003680745,0.000094570874,0.000073485455,0.30975288],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99835324,0.00061778136,0.000034500576,0.00019519104,0.00043093247,0.00036829477],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99892956,0.00024261451,0.000058535206,0.00009701457,0.00044105103,0.00023115384],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009859345,0.00043681296,0.00025341357,0.00081692374,0.01473789,0.008064192,0.00080944656,0.0021932693,0.016556174],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0018475624,0.00023000618,0.00023261561,0.0009763579,0.013016453,0.0023543113,0.0019496583,0.0032821218,0.001056145],"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":[0.000025576865,0.000011240782,0.0020916082,0.00006377015,0.000008037694,0.0005849809,0.0884122,0.00034388204,0.00069385004,0.85325783,0.032391787,0.022115186],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000056252566,0.000014037288,0.0067763766,0.0002603727,0.000010040573,0.00024928147,0.048842773,0.00047155452,0.00051306444,0.014323081,0.92847085,0.00006283629],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.92933935,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9610113,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07066065,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.041902356,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.028454198,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.30402428},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.47717074,0.021984877,0.013238034,0.02902046,0.0045361156,0.00077984045,0.0020737778,0.00015038565,0.45104578],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7930823,0.028274547,0.017248092,0.0021266374,0.0008742714,0.00034029523,0.0017419808,0.00006244655,0.1562495],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9988097,0.00047393024,0.00011784104,0.00008115417,0.00041285992,0.000104573555],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99306136,0.004656857,0.0007428228,0.00023665265,0.0008571837,0.00044504978],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0024453762,0.00017259987,0.00019893772,0.0017571253,0.0009744861,0.0016402815,0.0004752668,0.00058471237,0.010010073],"category_scores_gemma":[0.020629622,0.00029026018,0.00023738165,0.00087823573,0.00064749515,0.0020756193,0.0013551912,0.0011915613,0.0010082821],"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":[0.00011531546,0.00025426602,0.09706419,0.00056572247,0.00005480068,0.0019026345,0.030780336,0.00031128197,0.0014394713,0.026649913,0.19543783,0.64542425],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000028850574,0.00027967404,0.34952334,0.0033850682,0.00006473445,0.0058229296,0.060754687,0.001028188,0.0022388876,0.031465735,0.5453201,0.00008778297],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003523494,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.012693101,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010010073,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005020715,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014929575,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.033487022},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"methods","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.008019792,0.0152516,0.03652181,0.49361014,0.018847551,0.00068910595,0.0050208666,0.031880468,0.39015865],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.052908596,0.032879952,0.14182042,0.20390218,0.013767175,0.00096447876,0.009786033,0.019886795,0.5240844],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98174804,0.0071169753,0.0012538737,0.001366456,0.0068614352,0.001653184],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9319755,0.01235602,0.0036457493,0.014649632,0.022768172,0.014604909],"candidate_categories":["scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014121352,0.0011975534,0.0009221112,0.0057465103,0.011674262,0.04385872,0.0034199385,0.0042566704,0.087632895],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07727271,0.0010277036,0.0012435853,0.011639048,0.0046662143,0.041462574,0.01457025,0.005874535,0.14508739],"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":[0.000017880066,0.000060190614,0.0014167485,0.000181622,0.000016948441,0.00010092055,0.0023479215,0.000036988553,0.00020915273,0.004217562,0.8713872,0.12000685],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000062595,0.000007446211,0.0005156047,0.00019046555,0.000006977425,0.00011557982,0.0029522185,0.00002909624,0.00019796596,0.0024174505,0.99353117,0.000029942168],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.014262867,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.028018074,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9561413,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0032899852,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.018917134,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2931612},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.02987842,0.022581436,0.0011763687,0.62125486,0.021142833,0.0003219932,0.0013809591,0.00018820084,0.30207494],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.13025162,0.004127407,0.0008840604,0.03203692,0.0010506575,0.00006338853,0.00016352804,0.000107798216,0.8313146],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99780935,0.00031311205,0.00005396881,0.0002839359,0.00060291565,0.0009366718],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9978688,0.00029665316,0.00006121713,0.00002827688,0.0006738896,0.001071167],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016733714,0.0005229214,0.00030586755,0.00073561806,0.046210036,0.003991954,0.0014776067,0.0049119387,0.026696216],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009536492,0.0005578734,0.0002994333,0.0010421441,0.0048305974,0.0012612393,0.0023786204,0.0071466723,0.0025231277],"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":[0.000039911396,0.000014115592,0.0016277399,0.00004397256,0.000007328459,0.0008200291,0.010427142,0.000084163265,0.00022506081,0.014292857,0.95807797,0.014339611],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000061771716,0.0000114487675,0.0044280705,0.00006780004,0.00000560984,0.00016528013,0.0144120585,0.000035359855,0.00013763602,0.00085480645,0.9798355,0.00004030039],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9497501,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99183875,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.050249875,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.033243418,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.092249945,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24119902},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.006713669,0.12092648,0.0022150353,0.37668678,0.023253566,0.000095933,0.00017711819,0.00005759332,0.4698739],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.15558037,0.038092848,0.0028414382,0.0914838,0.008005619,0.00018989276,0.0000820746,0.00023743119,0.7034865],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9968935,0.0012672832,0.00011608296,0.00043879123,0.00076702744,0.000517307],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99413896,0.003048679,0.00022222179,0.00036968486,0.0010887654,0.0011317737],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006639525,0.00035402505,0.00040335426,0.0011479947,0.011172562,0.005573547,0.0009254572,0.004724547,0.023704981],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011336798,0.0005189691,0.00032543676,0.0010524092,0.011541715,0.0032923082,0.0034890615,0.010731355,0.0033063816],"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":[0.0000772987,0.00009572071,0.00042365305,0.00023925146,0.000011206546,0.00021071965,0.0062579773,0.00015868469,0.00015039735,0.39495435,0.52125955,0.07616117],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000050033896,0.000005534483,0.00043557186,0.00023334302,0.0000018078734,0.000034780027,0.0005822693,0.000028180877,0.000073355695,0.008244543,0.99034697,0.000008756185],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.057281185,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1540501,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.057281185,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011465705,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.016862951,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.113895535},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0044545266,0.007432733,0.00062484294,0.10574618,0.020571308,0.00023086902,0.030115893,0.0010785137,0.82974505],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.02073701,0.007578571,0.00045890955,0.03117119,0.007618808,0.00047530577,0.014806372,0.001886953,0.91526693],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99719185,0.00035546318,0.00024346523,0.0001833018,0.0016830516,0.00034297808],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99036473,0.0026146772,0.0007587434,0.0006111079,0.0041877446,0.0014629425],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0027396088,0.00052517094,0.0006680004,0.0028388288,0.0033143878,0.008662561,0.001385625,0.002968611,0.32845178],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023314616,0.00042250686,0.00045423475,0.0054154377,0.0012367924,0.009605114,0.0032373401,0.0031837213,0.17467341],"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":[0.0000061322207,0.000007313776,0.0002482272,0.0000438984,5.634758e-7,0.000016687522,0.00017394686,0.0000056641393,0.000015020927,0.0010121518,0.99229515,0.0061751762],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000020162104,0.0000041720314,0.0011898649,0.00012524753,7.339548e-7,0.000016625841,0.00063070585,0.000009054765,0.00003280446,0.0005587211,0.9974251,0.0000051160882],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.033122838,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04962498,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.32845178,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0037512751,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004258791,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.95788205},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.24360639,0.0018588583,0.0014016754,0.076044604,0.00075671595,0.00049963646,0.0009281957,0.00010763392,0.6747963],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.63772684,0.0012759176,0.0012057822,0.012471683,0.00017432326,0.00012359707,0.0002792002,0.000044476874,0.3466982],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9975381,0.0004944196,0.00006619147,0.00018276766,0.0006458789,0.0010726496],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9967139,0.0013335214,0.00014933934,0.00014995586,0.0005852249,0.0010681216],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0026037092,0.00033375603,0.0002885195,0.0012736504,0.018748589,0.0035784265,0.001959591,0.0063281152,0.017631706],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008909539,0.00044006036,0.00034571945,0.00081328093,0.0029698731,0.0009871479,0.0031055934,0.0052646766,0.0015422367],"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":[0.00028341703,0.00020929234,0.02048158,0.00013935348,0.0000564327,0.010538262,0.03384528,0.003637681,0.0015265817,0.19054829,0.6772539,0.0614799],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014915632,0.00029291646,0.08811982,0.0003549373,0.00010397786,0.0012236483,0.07096411,0.0028259843,0.0033285355,0.017065587,0.8154036,0.00016775152],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8499755,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.97807616,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15002447,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0358755,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.034835182,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.30181593},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00016855734,0.0003376415,0.0011100905,0.0013065889,0.0008870991,0.00004515849,0.003885861,0.00978402,0.982475],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.002673327,0.00028673856,0.0006295411,0.0008365711,0.00018871731,0.000055211534,0.002675713,0.010742037,0.98191214],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9993643,0.00006485162,0.000023209723,0.00013480644,0.0003081877,0.000104569874],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99682343,0.00042970336,0.00012774904,0.00054713455,0.00094046287,0.0011315697],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007769402,0.0008116219,0.0005911483,0.0016584985,0.0027242687,0.0060163573,0.001969383,0.0019718627,0.9436269],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00612667,0.00069059513,0.0003844559,0.0024006297,0.0009672104,0.004956186,0.0036535037,0.0018579767,0.94311094],"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":[0.00001889856,0.000009737751,0.00005105283,0.00006493298,6.478354e-7,0.000014598897,0.000038101793,0.000014573261,0.000071255374,0.0022248416,0.9659205,0.031570867],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000039776055,0.0000038979574,0.00009094976,0.00002952988,4.6979096e-7,0.00001648936,0.000035560166,0.000022545375,0.0000969616,0.00043373383,0.99926144,0.000004298697],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012903595,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.018865852,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05637312,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002072333,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0018499917,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08040935},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.011063826,0.15900415,0.05919543,0.03891148,0.00096665195,0.00008890962,0.00017963596,0.000055414646,0.7305345],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.674215,0.098769665,0.03738125,0.0035727022,0.0034610054,0.00041125726,0.00031972807,0.0002160102,0.18165338],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9930403,0.003845292,0.00034368414,0.00056468113,0.0018583944,0.0003475981],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9763683,0.021404985,0.0006286589,0.0007673573,0.0006739356,0.00015683354],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0075132865,0.0006621813,0.0010811769,0.0025782688,0.0018151426,0.01003883,0.0013578662,0.0035422088,0.0110706],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02499325,0.0005289811,0.000532117,0.0037158488,0.016397601,0.011248198,0.0018176646,0.0026733545,0.0012240637],"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":[0.000009077078,0.000009543355,0.000050812174,0.000101982936,0.00000814724,0.000016536114,0.0005089285,0.0006643138,0.000058686706,0.9749572,0.004160703,0.019454151],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000004616223,0.0000083645955,0.00020123925,0.0001606785,0.000005845379,0.000025703606,0.00018789968,0.00046467467,0.000067644076,0.97909296,0.019775724,0.000004651152],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0018973985,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0023981873,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0110706,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005513657,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0035704803,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04000455},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00627897,0.00858945,0.0016309614,0.6229754,0.012776999,0.0004913018,0.0008264829,0.00022628113,0.3462042],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.035514448,0.0027541416,0.00084959634,0.19654824,0.0029345169,0.00026332497,0.00015280429,0.0002523039,0.7607306],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99426395,0.00076892134,0.00015862187,0.00085799955,0.0015275737,0.0024229418],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99568546,0.0017787663,0.00009933407,0.00012786656,0.0010021302,0.0013064573],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0060589574,0.0011465384,0.0007928964,0.001209906,0.024041181,0.009787147,0.0045589735,0.033270292,0.05264385],"category_scores_gemma":[0.021282027,0.0013343279,0.0010466784,0.0011164332,0.0045335055,0.0030023798,0.0033042433,0.0241299,0.0059547457],"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":[0.000039662453,0.000035766523,0.00058779167,0.000033286185,0.000021204609,0.0005539197,0.0003962712,0.0003876287,0.00018842143,0.040000755,0.9506258,0.0071294648],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008376239,0.000027903798,0.0025757647,0.00012017795,0.000033576525,0.000126959,0.0012411212,0.0005587254,0.00039665954,0.009383404,0.9853607,0.00009123391],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8869756,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9664234,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.11302441,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.040049497,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.063021354,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.29058075},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.023139123,0.011090045,0.015520801,0.22873485,0.0042533227,0.0016332243,0.0060213185,0.0005981007,0.7090093],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.37910128,0.010264631,0.03854252,0.23626527,0.0015057544,0.0014504639,0.0028920402,0.00036856596,0.3296095],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.91541344,0.005969538,0.004936749,0.004568746,0.06073474,0.008376769],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9035208,0.027515346,0.0031329296,0.005058909,0.05502539,0.0057467073],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.029439367,0.0008235886,0.0011173487,0.003939763,0.018821476,0.01819972,0.005826204,0.015594142,0.007928244],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08528389,0.0021587114,0.0015509386,0.0039314204,0.015633086,0.0043933187,0.0057822415,0.017597586,0.002820371],"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":[0.000063751424,0.00007504336,0.0031978323,0.00028768543,0.000044940625,0.0005664049,0.005633209,0.0006246494,0.00087123207,0.6519061,0.3104851,0.026244078],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008861531,0.0000619841,0.0098907985,0.0016131393,0.00012166689,0.00021790521,0.0021704542,0.0012845137,0.0013773097,0.03082316,0.9520229,0.00032751213],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.98324203,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.988106,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.11929332,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.11929332,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.40880194,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.86553764},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.49071178,0.018681811,0.0032823207,0.15895952,0.00047894177,0.00013266703,0.0010471292,0.00006493958,0.3266409],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98618954,0.0017763101,0.0009339596,0.0026907336,0.000031511965,0.00000885646,0.0000580748,0.000028179342,0.00828286],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98738587,0.0022323525,0.0005046467,0.0012447353,0.0053624716,0.0032700684],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.91753453,0.041175045,0.0025305634,0.0017044684,0.033097535,0.003957818],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016047124,0.00023811407,0.0004890057,0.0034856664,0.016087236,0.014471031,0.0020452451,0.003102952,0.009557783],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08125271,0.0006429379,0.000345558,0.00500326,0.016157154,0.0025725095,0.003846351,0.0050673955,0.00031853328],"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":[0.00069865905,0.0000808233,0.06876173,0.000492144,0.0002039147,0.001893098,0.1440716,0.0035328185,0.0019486072,0.52543706,0.06927652,0.18360312],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014650049,0.00013896683,0.20190881,0.0019425153,0.00030008823,0.00043752717,0.12507601,0.004342146,0.00414039,0.0780578,0.58283776,0.00067152665],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9907802,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9953685,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15481783,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.15481783,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.17146617,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9802915},"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":"editorial","genre_gemma":"editorial","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"editorial","genre_consensus":"editorial","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.000089708665,0.0057542827,0.00027923242,0.1573796,0.80599535,0.00009145332,0.00061273185,0.0003273321,0.02947033],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.001852146,0.008335961,0.00063098304,0.23283486,0.5159331,0.00021386032,0.00068060466,0.00043171027,0.2390868],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9943342,0.0004383103,0.0005438049,0.0009921857,0.0031529716,0.0005384492],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97567195,0.0043191086,0.0012457303,0.0012841529,0.014529407,0.0029495433],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00417851,0.0013701114,0.0018426349,0.0028117318,0.0028493733,0.008335876,0.0039750533,0.010783443,0.18715248],"category_scores_gemma":[0.038161427,0.0007642501,0.0018329909,0.0021522709,0.0011779284,0.004209555,0.0023566731,0.008803733,0.13830268],"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":[0.0000038246003,0.0000030627893,0.000016967524,0.000044215452,0.0000011724374,0.000020908661,0.0000044235335,0.0000049843816,0.000015180941,0.0001792279,0.9950852,0.004620881],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000075938356,0.0000053438785,0.00011601882,0.00011817571,0.0000029172302,0.000058060356,0.000017231572,0.000017946988,0.000025904435,0.00025464295,0.99937075,0.000005342905],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0037918482,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009153815,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.18715248,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0027262827,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0070907054,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6260874},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.024256237,0.0031923952,0.00030437118,0.011020482,0.0013476711,0.000043770444,0.0015234924,0.00009992845,0.9582116],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.23231621,0.006852378,0.001491044,0.0031086337,0.00021281962,0.000059403057,0.001071972,0.00011544667,0.75477207],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99945015,0.00005840179,0.00003405728,0.00008646327,0.00019058371,0.00018029311],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980019,0.0002450811,0.000089113724,0.00017847995,0.0010690278,0.00041640393],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00074671005,0.00031312826,0.0003267892,0.001008975,0.00556861,0.0074112006,0.00060361705,0.00078053557,0.19377117],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0026410348,0.00020577302,0.00018228647,0.002405632,0.0044813016,0.0011780082,0.0014386298,0.00081312715,0.017987449],"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":[0.000065888154,0.000059547187,0.01538709,0.00030710697,0.00002229013,0.00033921542,0.01028403,0.00024426234,0.0008601303,0.12052535,0.6732046,0.17870052],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000005413091,0.0000061060305,0.024703057,0.00012358642,0.000007944437,0.000059140584,0.0056541045,0.000064052656,0.000097638185,0.0022056615,0.96705765,0.000015688742],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8732849,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9278934,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8732849,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012043551,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02948498,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6482291},"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":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0042783576,0.016062524,0.017386656,0.4558226,0.01897679,0.00020179291,0.0015960363,0.00010642352,0.48556885],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.15332778,0.01624893,0.035111405,0.04726802,0.011991008,0.0004665842,0.0012189507,0.0002448524,0.7341224],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99662316,0.000738135,0.00019193305,0.00039519582,0.001430575,0.00062102336],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9975841,0.00050243345,0.00009965892,0.00018334977,0.0012395594,0.00039090155],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0039888574,0.0008438504,0.000632619,0.0010565188,0.008507051,0.006638411,0.0024878003,0.00634366,0.035717938],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009762528,0.00043180457,0.0016768433,0.0016386408,0.0044232765,0.0029180467,0.0019961759,0.0073402305,0.0028105048],"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":[0.000013269134,0.00001579626,0.00019623521,0.00006467066,0.000017512768,0.000078106576,0.00022391923,0.0012778661,0.000053287218,0.5461524,0.44329378,0.008613243],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000020492973,0.000011784993,0.0009515796,0.00023819161,0.000022332571,0.0000880967,0.00066888164,0.0021516664,0.00010126271,0.22332947,0.772365,0.00005121199],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5741579,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.73584676,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4258421,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.040919703,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.048555702,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.85669994},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.03251734,0.0532423,0.14198984,0.6979337,0.00265237,0.00071775826,0.0001285811,0.00014327934,0.07067489],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6912491,0.024868129,0.18053402,0.08837774,0.002417052,0.0022157654,0.000081124366,0.00009415062,0.010162936],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.71453106,0.23982053,0.008626145,0.0116317775,0.020640068,0.004750456],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.54648113,0.388779,0.0153036555,0.012742203,0.032912258,0.0037816959],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.4264456,0.0007133628,0.0013810482,0.008881621,0.009510332,0.016921058,0.0072999718,0.014204774,0.003135891],"category_scores_gemma":[0.34400862,0.0012491018,0.0011701777,0.005663014,0.043609418,0.025430158,0.010081746,0.014049604,0.00049829023],"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":[0.00004233569,0.000065716406,0.0044189687,0.0004820107,0.000052863772,0.0001683253,0.011418744,0.0007703133,0.0001729908,0.876277,0.015106237,0.09102447],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013430773,0.00035541662,0.011545837,0.0064434065,0.00011190059,0.00031522627,0.021750106,0.0062633073,0.0014464527,0.77063084,0.18075551,0.0002476848],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.017901946,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03719484,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.99048966,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.014550586,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.039056435,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7072947},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.07619391,0.022013752,0.27408817,0.5035494,0.0032311985,0.0010626004,0.000082659964,0.00020800291,0.11957032],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6496282,0.00621108,0.2759782,0.057976257,0.0009867414,0.0017749856,0.000043904794,0.000073992436,0.007326586],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.7601031,0.19198164,0.009881246,0.012508184,0.018062666,0.007463146],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.71817756,0.22312565,0.0116409175,0.013800169,0.029559376,0.0036962826],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.33818763,0.000977349,0.0015595944,0.0068571605,0.015793474,0.02146977,0.007141937,0.016355516,0.0019881185],"category_scores_gemma":[0.23494217,0.0011353412,0.001480014,0.0038490398,0.053617664,0.031305525,0.013511224,0.016438853,0.00035828067],"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":[0.00003333788,0.000050354298,0.0023523995,0.00015116112,0.000025879666,0.00023959386,0.018605173,0.0005948623,0.00023151163,0.9447324,0.0028656083,0.03011772],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009637591,0.0004049969,0.0055513396,0.002847492,0.00012779221,0.0004388459,0.03430232,0.0059279716,0.002708544,0.8369741,0.1103688,0.00025150474],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01812369,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.040708303,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9842065,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.017211543,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04172366,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8161325},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.30206403,0.04176909,0.05076362,0.25589934,0.0026203557,0.00019379541,0.00008637156,0.00013410527,0.34646937],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9763727,0.004254219,0.00667578,0.009603218,0.00054152595,0.00004114319,0.000020451442,0.00003294266,0.0024580285],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97795314,0.012116118,0.0008091155,0.0026655705,0.005208663,0.0012475466],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.87642515,0.09509322,0.011202711,0.0042884727,0.008342959,0.0046473886],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03771165,0.00038546065,0.00050593715,0.0041823313,0.0077388627,0.011180319,0.001777113,0.005741448,0.0035680197],"category_scores_gemma":[0.109837905,0.00062799436,0.0004871877,0.0016510905,0.06611284,0.0115982685,0.004588363,0.0069019715,0.0005467867],"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":[0.00014819943,0.00020203734,0.015393728,0.00030010098,0.000074440235,0.00070645043,0.028569182,0.0008681718,0.00068812974,0.8737425,0.008978855,0.070328236],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000049674603,0.0001141028,0.01542109,0.0006276318,0.00003694264,0.0005932622,0.008869592,0.0009259102,0.00038965192,0.9437379,0.029126931,0.000107379135],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0066891303,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007921972,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03771165,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005381823,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007341732,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.19944066},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.116055824,0.006612005,0.009480623,0.029076248,0.0006645763,0.00008932934,0.00040557803,0.00009763316,0.8375183],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.78132236,0.0020016532,0.0018587662,0.0018821418,0.000072214054,0.000047856556,0.000114845825,0.0000628391,0.21263723],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99836963,0.0005775637,0.000034428933,0.0002167393,0.00044599306,0.00035574663],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988919,0.00023592848,0.00006359565,0.0000801922,0.00047738108,0.00025099108],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009501894,0.00046456765,0.00026881837,0.0010012758,0.01378751,0.007834781,0.00079242815,0.002223005,0.012822524],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0017274652,0.00021908186,0.00024406172,0.0012674375,0.014102597,0.0023680923,0.0017677785,0.0031089804,0.00084175274],"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":[0.000022243386,0.000011101618,0.0022917076,0.00007797362,0.000008663793,0.0004838153,0.0813587,0.00033723481,0.0005796829,0.87201,0.022987336,0.019831527],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000007727739,0.000018038712,0.0108110355,0.00042036027,0.00001598123,0.0003322366,0.06083267,0.000536229,0.00049846526,0.020803085,0.90564734,0.00007684281],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9382666,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.95867956,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.061733425,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.04641316,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03535028,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.33675265},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.85364544,0.010200188,0.0053618453,0.011812029,0.00029763312,0.000093583345,0.00038098652,0.0000277812,0.11818056],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9891958,0.0031020083,0.00082947646,0.0005397543,0.00007168877,0.00004176376,0.0001328967,0.000018774095,0.0060678823],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99584866,0.0018060325,0.00018473393,0.0007250426,0.00080061075,0.0006349033],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9899638,0.0038802098,0.0031232154,0.0006695756,0.001202608,0.001160583],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0044892137,0.000484698,0.0006070492,0.0021779425,0.0033494476,0.006455588,0.00085135386,0.0012792477,0.0113846455],"category_scores_gemma":[0.013953572,0.00037515897,0.0005450462,0.002143139,0.009231883,0.0046289493,0.004111413,0.0031532014,0.00074446056],"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":[0.0003316509,0.00031448173,0.45667487,0.00077936746,0.00042167923,0.0022825804,0.18498184,0.0006788169,0.0005180798,0.27430353,0.00635188,0.072361216],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003750595,0.00016559499,0.7243914,0.0017931036,0.00036191716,0.0016806315,0.1289341,0.0007799676,0.0005272816,0.070913784,0.07027851,0.0001362936],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.027962934,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.041516896,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.027962934,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0036859962,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004515073,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.055600345},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8433382,0.0011477784,0.007910567,0.012382272,0.00021137556,0.00007198011,0.000118998934,0.000056934223,0.13476194],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.971329,0.0005572451,0.0011314937,0.000619731,0.000026335314,0.00004772463,0.000045699915,0.000048473503,0.026194321],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9930555,0.00406259,0.00018547568,0.00080472435,0.001020163,0.0008715138],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98580766,0.00685099,0.002927163,0.0014099812,0.002145135,0.000859064],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009408465,0.00039709255,0.00033539024,0.0013610441,0.006689986,0.009318699,0.0010119891,0.0016209184,0.006618718],"category_scores_gemma":[0.032819726,0.00048174866,0.00021026707,0.0014998785,0.013485367,0.007035541,0.004688384,0.0028805933,0.001600328],"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":[0.00006955565,0.00004432511,0.043488476,0.000069314214,0.00001653335,0.00092341466,0.8507781,0.000105639665,0.00080544467,0.078548774,0.0029575827,0.022192864],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000012735936,0.000064496715,0.044158593,0.00029042087,0.000029687917,0.0005927513,0.7944075,0.00043777993,0.0014258466,0.022310264,0.13620451,0.00006550071],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.024353648,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.028236415,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.024353648,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003946295,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0046796366,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0497573},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.25999558,0.003378027,0.2606487,0.09211341,0.0003783945,0.00013159476,0.00036581373,0.0001547342,0.38283378],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98870623,0.0004073377,0.007911368,0.0006340461,0.00014371779,0.00003449895,0.000034502238,0.000018919338,0.0021093984],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9952479,0.0025173249,0.0001849679,0.0007157205,0.00092185615,0.00041230634],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97964877,0.013342122,0.0016335872,0.0032291398,0.0015165694,0.0006298055],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009161858,0.0003690214,0.0006834226,0.0019284171,0.0024197705,0.008773388,0.0018296717,0.005390521,0.01126336],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03654242,0.00048107596,0.0006100653,0.0014458149,0.028723517,0.015456585,0.0036856544,0.004461445,0.0006846129],"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":[0.000026217716,0.0000151864615,0.00038036337,0.00001821663,0.000008403254,0.000037664686,0.0008327954,0.000761531,0.00013778365,0.9922388,0.00049019797,0.0050529083],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008815954,0.000005195929,0.00027201435,0.000013338798,0.0000026833627,0.000024749701,0.00015530587,0.0011127683,0.00006293504,0.9974855,0.0008515841,0.0000051325405],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0047177426,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0027259884,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01126336,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002784585,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0050920215,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.048453152},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0006495482,0.009719892,0.00044039224,0.0023251523,0.0017829561,0.000029834442,0.0007480716,0.00014793867,0.9841562],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0024483085,0.002465776,0.00022154237,0.0007256721,0.00012759752,0.000017763095,0.00027683107,0.000063596315,0.99365294],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99957484,0.000037919537,0.000026848107,0.00012923422,0.00016842465,0.00006279685],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997508,0.000052310374,0.000019620356,0.000032032665,0.00009643773,0.00004880301],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002497242,0.00065799686,0.00047360884,0.0012304087,0.0022230316,0.0048465757,0.00074144267,0.0019533555,0.4779218],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00087688066,0.00033225978,0.00029331076,0.0016147954,0.00095000694,0.0034331505,0.0020645503,0.0018041442,0.2532588],"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":[0.000046059555,0.000028265462,0.00031673198,0.00033614808,0.000004154752,0.0003889314,0.0010923268,0.00011437681,0.00064444885,0.17306638,0.66086227,0.16309996],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000015386917,0.000003695194,0.00011554026,0.000052100375,3.7301277e-7,0.000073933,0.00008809073,0.000007747199,0.000033577664,0.0013295305,0.99829227,0.0000016586624],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008552591,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.024745775,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.52207816,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0024275456,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014686462,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0},"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":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.040801633,0.11428041,0.08406277,0.0483813,0.0029626319,0.00025085759,0.00010985396,0.0001619389,0.7089886],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.88206804,0.029227108,0.022744162,0.0109867705,0.0023700201,0.0006341901,0.00006747729,0.00017494283,0.051727407],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9819041,0.0091191875,0.0011680833,0.0014457837,0.004756988,0.0016059261],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9909689,0.0057419445,0.0012619521,0.000881364,0.00076652225,0.00037933013],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010103259,0.0006001636,0.00075672375,0.0024398214,0.0040640747,0.010258992,0.0020900816,0.004635373,0.0046421764],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023086434,0.0005808937,0.0005601795,0.001781378,0.036148366,0.010418614,0.007171475,0.0072872974,0.00077856844],"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":[0.000008179061,0.000005539114,0.00014153443,0.00003473733,0.0000022469503,0.000039092007,0.002039944,0.00008624442,0.000036722107,0.9903527,0.0010068265,0.006246254],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000015525888,0.000060366492,0.0011953843,0.00064629264,0.000018533316,0.0003253956,0.0029169263,0.0005339779,0.00031806328,0.83365464,0.16027158,0.00004335324],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0042918297,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005032638,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010258992,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007205506,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004861395,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05343175},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.03824043,0.00090510235,0.44294608,0.025674537,0.0006181159,0.00060542213,0.00039050018,0.00021216432,0.4904077],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8941048,0.0006158693,0.059922364,0.002113695,0.00048600868,0.0006966804,0.00018511337,0.0000930182,0.041782554],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9873883,0.0054170466,0.0008818166,0.0020373263,0.0034431287,0.00083230314],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.967722,0.02316414,0.0016788457,0.004196312,0.0024483805,0.00079022633],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01191295,0.00090083113,0.001238986,0.0031189704,0.0036900751,0.0061444715,0.0014619896,0.0054753865,0.018726056],"category_scores_gemma":[0.026237953,0.0011319924,0.0015376485,0.0019228389,0.015240411,0.011937965,0.004695385,0.0069223763,0.0017137333],"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":[0.0000037440032,0.000007247419,0.00018286603,0.000013880392,0.0000072179114,0.00003716924,0.00026309412,0.00010981022,0.0000545288,0.99807596,0.00020091147,0.0010436046],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000007495062,0.000011329798,0.00019114441,0.000025871124,0.000015338253,0.0001309466,0.00016543764,0.0006339411,0.00015026522,0.9943651,0.0042969943,0.0000060394473],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0013695342,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0012834296,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.018726056,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0022542237,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004455191,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06300247},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.23619048,0.07125317,0.05053008,0.013900649,0.0003492926,0.0002075079,0.0002454231,0.00009467401,0.6272287],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97464603,0.010774455,0.0047910176,0.0007815037,0.00027436813,0.0001307104,0.00009476693,0.000037123864,0.0084700305],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9889747,0.006220905,0.0006334536,0.00093328394,0.0023460204,0.0008916182],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99012136,0.006068193,0.001161874,0.0009275763,0.0012905913,0.0004304146],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.013192613,0.00017655834,0.0004987053,0.0043062274,0.0040402682,0.00702985,0.0013985849,0.0025254572,0.004647381],"category_scores_gemma":[0.021864556,0.00031316708,0.00050323963,0.0048831506,0.017259747,0.0051604575,0.0027096237,0.0020036383,0.00035387216],"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":[0.000020334523,0.000025821311,0.0014115905,0.000100275756,0.000010138209,0.00006357585,0.0034730192,0.0009029334,0.00013297233,0.9752543,0.00057789806,0.018027222],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007800474,0.0003609494,0.053373158,0.0013308829,0.00008776133,0.0007264448,0.014630023,0.00341462,0.0012793929,0.5910511,0.33354858,0.000119132616],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006944608,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006245697,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.013192613,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008733912,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007497849,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06977004},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9402981,0.0006798535,0.0029193661,0.0050873607,0.000113884176,0.00027952323,0.00018614117,0.000049167615,0.050386555],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99343216,0.0002693607,0.0012966394,0.0005537121,0.000015456484,0.000048256097,0.00006987161,0.000014161366,0.0043003405],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99849105,0.00037320537,0.00013229318,0.0003085045,0.00025458555,0.00044032422],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99474984,0.0010127772,0.00094251137,0.0006494979,0.0014898146,0.0011556076],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003443935,0.00020378108,0.00016367651,0.0005092286,0.0020429096,0.00459683,0.000957564,0.0008130427,0.006885985],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0034647074,0.00028385982,0.00040160812,0.00055597944,0.0012689256,0.0040932097,0.0021014842,0.0016441897,0.00087796134],"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":[0.0018268825,0.0019167048,0.31322142,0.001734384,0.00019220191,0.016744163,0.031112844,0.0067851334,0.017948342,0.33415115,0.017859643,0.25650713],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00091733,0.003025756,0.4738325,0.0016750528,0.00047048836,0.008525772,0.10166881,0.02062529,0.013666535,0.034277074,0.34077176,0.00054368563],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011022928,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.019203354,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.011022928,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0027733424,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007526974,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.023035884},"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":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.2590043,0.30252182,0.0071565937,0.12230111,0.0032783106,0.0010106375,0.0034601334,0.00013005295,0.30113712],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.92836255,0.05169424,0.00289807,0.0061458433,0.00030254317,0.0001419102,0.0005413727,0.000041310195,0.009872076],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9565635,0.005690755,0.003037412,0.0021151402,0.029467864,0.0031254217],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.85193235,0.04957888,0.01243632,0.0024571568,0.08114884,0.0024465106],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.037934206,0.00034692205,0.0008132344,0.007091273,0.0069724172,0.0067870454,0.002943403,0.0016772225,0.0023900408],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08736189,0.00052105315,0.00057732256,0.011536538,0.009626017,0.0015857688,0.001885305,0.0020340793,0.00028561402],"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":[0.0004286764,0.00008431147,0.12900357,0.0142867165,0.00039695043,0.001907322,0.060400598,0.002736111,0.0023031281,0.152941,0.15799505,0.47751656],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008581987,0.00016929333,0.35323596,0.013065689,0.00070918706,0.00037773818,0.0343958,0.0017528445,0.0021830695,0.009641932,0.5840181,0.00036445959],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.97856563,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99187577,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.14761275,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.14761275,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.22208649,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9886484},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0114516495,0.0016647122,0.2864546,0.015278043,0.00021672768,0.00026959414,0.00015742063,0.000057543013,0.68444973],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.75273526,0.0031531088,0.1277875,0.0046430714,0.0006046692,0.00095818524,0.0001768436,0.00009986852,0.10984144],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.994152,0.0019330948,0.00022290286,0.0013044738,0.0017762029,0.0006112686],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9967505,0.0018118601,0.00035296133,0.00045931872,0.00048385,0.000141442],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0049545025,0.0006462076,0.00051531335,0.0024990325,0.00464726,0.006844225,0.0021178478,0.002966557,0.008027874],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0073679667,0.00038818803,0.0010221257,0.0020193367,0.025777165,0.008089746,0.0028789681,0.004438794,0.0016954667],"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":[9.306402e-7,0.000002697616,0.00003262975,0.0000033636404,4.7588287e-7,0.0000034814357,0.00009668613,0.00012556379,0.000006316571,0.99839056,0.00020847909,0.0011288645],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000057286725,0.0000068103664,0.00011300678,0.000022177104,0.0000021031037,0.000021421483,0.000087946006,0.001152146,0.000052589934,0.97806704,0.02046462,0.000004428058],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010444805,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0065811803,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010444805,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008645919,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008511573,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06273085},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.81319255,0.0019205725,0.0010167257,0.054239582,0.00032137425,0.00017509413,0.00094224483,0.000033591055,0.12815836],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98357326,0.0009953498,0.0004560474,0.0009217177,0.000087417335,0.00004427911,0.00013752337,0.000015865966,0.013768583],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9967415,0.0017544136,0.00018187903,0.00020235596,0.0006895204,0.00043029847],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9537001,0.03626165,0.003938055,0.0010170335,0.0038050748,0.0012779911],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010733122,0.00018646475,0.0004120046,0.000981169,0.0022484483,0.0052130115,0.000554703,0.0024003945,0.025264768],"category_scores_gemma":[0.101910405,0.00039504023,0.00024391981,0.0011548272,0.004303307,0.0022981567,0.0010134334,0.0023874592,0.003616534],"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":[0.008221879,0.0012099321,0.27279878,0.0008301681,0.0004067271,0.0021032596,0.0786182,0.005065606,0.007250774,0.04448887,0.24621622,0.33278963],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005826052,0.0010162046,0.8595904,0.0006963674,0.00027938565,0.0005026779,0.061669342,0.012567417,0.0045641745,0.027710197,0.030481517,0.0003397405],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.13295126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.20935662,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.13295126,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003843243,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0034526587,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.26435477},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7863289,0.004405095,0.10969886,0.03593998,0.00059296965,0.0014687312,0.00006268472,0.00015444658,0.061348367],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9690608,0.00052328047,0.027141035,0.0012268241,0.00028024497,0.00031291862,0.00001498241,0.000026354046,0.0014134652],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9384008,0.04475422,0.0016547202,0.0031155962,0.009888601,0.002186003],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7866286,0.15484147,0.025816906,0.019381355,0.010302131,0.003029549],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.059582304,0.00037983563,0.0010460941,0.0014079403,0.0018485923,0.003509625,0.0015542863,0.0026964636,0.0037965723],"category_scores_gemma":[0.28180498,0.00045269847,0.0007010765,0.00087820814,0.005139367,0.0043237377,0.0028195048,0.0017313765,0.000690374],"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":[0.0026851369,0.001980497,0.16347301,0.0024558106,0.00085883774,0.000272729,0.025408085,0.010465879,0.0094105555,0.16667543,0.004177866,0.6121362],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0022713612,0.019448243,0.46611002,0.002654394,0.001147836,0.0013557434,0.022011934,0.046400573,0.028763069,0.32719958,0.08199753,0.00063970406],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009012574,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019452458,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.059582304,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0018030076,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0049640983,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.31510514},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.38569063,0.004279006,0.0163936,0.03710003,0.0010457258,0.0006270048,0.0004562349,0.0002681187,0.55413973],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9616582,0.0013653762,0.006462639,0.010897076,0.00041853226,0.00021384978,0.00017235932,0.000035558656,0.018776286],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9877819,0.002498094,0.0011388967,0.0007464296,0.0057895947,0.0020451967],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.986584,0.007229348,0.0016450671,0.0009816786,0.0028441278,0.0007158037],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010326257,0.00025444516,0.00027076376,0.0017537309,0.0047069048,0.0053001926,0.0017131324,0.0055377847,0.0021025604],"category_scores_gemma":[0.022185314,0.00033594563,0.00046273833,0.0012266143,0.008584653,0.0019532896,0.0030732315,0.004729803,0.00066155684],"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":[0.00014748682,0.00013379409,0.03151123,0.00035516877,0.000018114315,0.004132236,0.03919665,0.0011571407,0.006126746,0.8074387,0.02873231,0.081050485],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000074415155,0.00059472973,0.1715628,0.0031799288,0.00016977589,0.008052105,0.043652527,0.003442708,0.012774895,0.2492813,0.5068266,0.00038822193],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08374277,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09853701,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08374277,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006172337,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.024563048,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.16651064},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.1608025,0.009235167,0.26334888,0.04560522,0.00096097187,0.00064326235,0.0077542397,0.0028051392,0.50884455],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.80026156,0.00676622,0.13334537,0.0022007744,0.000793169,0.00033606548,0.00400459,0.0003625835,0.05192975],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9910307,0.003312625,0.001062858,0.0011800332,0.003032274,0.00038140314],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96987534,0.017282007,0.0032611256,0.0049759527,0.0036401968,0.00096530473],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014197551,0.00021624425,0.0005838188,0.0060348064,0.002708629,0.011829558,0.0016764131,0.0013167277,0.021172721],"category_scores_gemma":[0.027161835,0.00040026044,0.00033820196,0.0063204654,0.003652216,0.013323782,0.003532793,0.001467804,0.006198936],"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":[0.00012278084,0.00013204862,0.018487968,0.00045831632,0.000027319717,0.0003892519,0.008233385,0.0015215359,0.0021095083,0.5047593,0.03228554,0.431473],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007292217,0.00020560122,0.018524488,0.0006691361,0.000067821624,0.0013526038,0.014998459,0.007835777,0.01063745,0.23836224,0.70708746,0.0001860216],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0041659116,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005213951,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.021172721,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003069853,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0058607054,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07508469},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.09786026,0.0030446674,0.0048290375,0.7596948,0.0006985686,0.0000934689,0.000097585624,0.000088357796,0.13359311],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.95126754,0.0013259603,0.0013260603,0.037200756,0.00030577043,0.00009969206,0.000038072307,0.00008900742,0.008347262],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9420518,0.029306717,0.0018879542,0.0038652103,0.012078447,0.010809754],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7890201,0.13962616,0.019999677,0.010854346,0.02089223,0.01960751],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.09787329,0.00042028865,0.0008831027,0.0036848127,0.026903603,0.031933546,0.005585225,0.015119364,0.009016206],"category_scores_gemma":[0.21104497,0.0009974303,0.00041814847,0.0051303077,0.063277505,0.022290997,0.016312538,0.018349467,0.0013389431],"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":[0.00003215518,0.00010611773,0.009016743,0.00020815278,0.000029072899,0.00026648637,0.150695,0.0002818466,0.0002269926,0.75279325,0.04498877,0.041355263],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000064862885,0.00006385515,0.017130623,0.0019078049,0.00004155887,0.00016466396,0.2558372,0.0016222126,0.0005716351,0.2510385,0.47139648,0.00016059417],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3839553,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.46369356,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3839553,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.047005594,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.14018673,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.76344085},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6188536,0.00572501,0.005126942,0.011937179,0.00009514282,0.000057501962,0.00068501855,0.000046217217,0.35747334],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.970044,0.001061539,0.00047765818,0.00035551417,0.00001989891,0.000017032422,0.00009687698,0.00001720866,0.027910382],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9973736,0.00035871266,0.000039699415,0.00023404314,0.0010409862,0.0009529614],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973055,0.00061325496,0.00024628194,0.00016351212,0.0013043045,0.00036705803],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00172768,0.00033776055,0.00039354217,0.001635163,0.004794737,0.0057420842,0.00082907436,0.0009772568,0.007063738],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0038293172,0.00017764093,0.00056158233,0.0015445071,0.005614552,0.0011459264,0.0023419634,0.0018446977,0.00020358375],"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":[0.00014462658,0.00003125169,0.046925202,0.00012901907,0.0001745911,0.00027915864,0.024914045,0.0058036414,0.0014553791,0.8731051,0.004873312,0.04216467],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007230535,0.00018478218,0.45665395,0.0011322882,0.0003387444,0.0002800694,0.045791883,0.005927732,0.0024168924,0.054302324,0.43264738,0.0002516934],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.92474276,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9503412,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07525724,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.043120448,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04612279,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.31286216},"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":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0134439,0.0027766176,0.0061974926,0.025124239,0.0011662964,0.00034284082,0.0008351357,0.00020353231,0.9499099],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.111456215,0.0011200666,0.003439582,0.0040040943,0.000101596735,0.0001631573,0.00020785155,0.00007619686,0.8794311],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99304056,0.00089329755,0.0001511551,0.00054197153,0.002734005,0.002639048],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9963607,0.0005656776,0.00007065308,0.00030804717,0.0021338526,0.00056112587],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003266774,0.00082701177,0.0005797515,0.0023487345,0.02131089,0.010955096,0.0030565944,0.006502132,0.038747028],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0109044,0.0011090598,0.0008952633,0.0033143295,0.007932285,0.0023684504,0.0026461605,0.0069524054,0.002590749],"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":[0.000016070606,0.00001677819,0.00047765652,0.000020795382,0.0000054363586,0.000042286974,0.0010738533,0.00052954565,0.0000486061,0.8627787,0.11980368,0.015186489],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003264106,0.000028908833,0.004129545,0.00015955028,0.000023281596,0.000062202605,0.0016103623,0.0016633165,0.0004142289,0.060553845,0.9312436,0.00007846187],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.98045737,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9909149,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.10555082,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.10555082,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.18506466,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7658284},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9520475,0.0005843761,0.006931172,0.0021297594,0.000066514214,0.00009274707,0.00020818436,0.000010073193,0.037929557],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99799585,0.00009072826,0.0012770422,0.000059681766,0.000034800247,0.000028938599,0.000057116806,0.0000034811983,0.00045229567],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9882527,0.007074634,0.0006495775,0.0011680112,0.0019639404,0.0008911024],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.92953044,0.046519153,0.011335035,0.0024518592,0.0076829838,0.0024804252],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016920393,0.00030215303,0.0005378379,0.0021095031,0.002387866,0.004011697,0.00065960205,0.001022097,0.0040904176],"category_scores_gemma":[0.09881316,0.00027291957,0.00032914517,0.0023860524,0.0032304756,0.002547469,0.0022239527,0.0020248082,0.00032683313],"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":[0.00089064334,0.00059961254,0.718411,0.00034132067,0.0004662445,0.00038863008,0.014165662,0.0064247157,0.0021199733,0.10542137,0.007173662,0.14359722],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006975175,0.00016813226,0.89221525,0.00009299856,0.0002317306,0.000057771547,0.0066703423,0.017489752,0.0015429354,0.07647,0.004914677,0.000076586126],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.022027379,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.036302388,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.022027379,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0026470856,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004220998,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08948463},"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":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9401084,0.0066181854,0.00078570074,0.022201315,0.00008519583,0.0001137031,0.000113474205,0.000017240825,0.02995687],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99407345,0.0025466313,0.00030533646,0.0010315863,0.000016839516,0.000016009277,0.000034744164,0.0000060786265,0.001969266],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.96720135,0.009251123,0.0011206081,0.0015801629,0.01529037,0.0055564847],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9414736,0.021958955,0.005615054,0.0009921968,0.024807492,0.00515258],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.028113661,0.00022598835,0.00059804803,0.004937507,0.019120194,0.00786526,0.0027215446,0.002008377,0.0016541195],"category_scores_gemma":[0.066336825,0.00050487946,0.00026253,0.00952671,0.012622072,0.0011527021,0.0028319708,0.0025439903,0.00019662704],"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":[0.00016763687,0.00013393043,0.15485688,0.0004694445,0.000064675885,0.00060922944,0.65509653,0.00051034946,0.0015360963,0.030500287,0.022015516,0.13403943],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000025536108,0.00009915211,0.3492065,0.0005917626,0.00004908755,0.00019227437,0.5525383,0.00072833383,0.00033907933,0.0030801902,0.09299685,0.00015289495],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9696492,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9846764,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.91869366,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.08130633,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.14931113,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5899215},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00015185193,0.000992518,0.00011611356,0.98520076,0.012422271,0.00000846254,0.000016452896,0.000014520515,0.0010770605],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.002938514,0.0006237674,0.00019180441,0.98295605,0.0092058135,0.000038547103,0.000011663403,0.00003715682,0.003996712],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98162717,0.008495711,0.0019007345,0.0023810673,0.0041495985,0.0014456253],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9532894,0.03154861,0.0022576065,0.001319475,0.00912621,0.002458794],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016069623,0.001230564,0.0020051731,0.0016165097,0.0092399465,0.0068681613,0.0052587613,0.06389159,0.009140205],"category_scores_gemma":[0.10963701,0.0014937381,0.0017802056,0.0015183801,0.01156325,0.009385561,0.00451819,0.06819532,0.0054017403],"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":[0.000013431469,0.000006524597,0.00008406999,0.000036038826,0.000005377772,0.00019162626,0.00092125626,0.000021905986,0.000046343008,0.006326472,0.9905687,0.0017781473],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000030504501,0.00003651837,0.00067515677,0.00078748935,0.000021718904,0.0011002104,0.00506041,0.0002267143,0.00034091706,0.012464735,0.9791109,0.00014491267],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.013520347,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.010204676,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06389159,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011002726,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009406047,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.084985316},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}