{"meta":{"query_hash":"9f4c9615bc80","filters":{"venue":"Administrative law review"},"cohort_total":3,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":3,"exported":3,"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/9f4c9615bc80","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Administrative+law+review"},"results":[{"id":"W1518167023","doi":"","title":"Mr. Justice Marshall Rothstein, Supreme Court of Canada, Address to the American Bar Association, Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Administrative law review","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial 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; Law; Association (psychology); Section (typography); Political science; Administrative law; Economic Justice; Bar (unit); Psychology; Business; Advertising; Geography","score_opus":0.06840600996292688,"score_gpt":0.35529124152952096,"score_spread":0.28688523156659407,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1518167023","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":[0.0019366279,0.035125878,0.0006774509,0.8388024,0.014425408,0.00013558468,0.0012087879,0.00019179785,0.10749603],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.03300871,0.014683338,0.0012165203,0.4076201,0.0039280187,0.00013558553,0.0003914345,0.00016822637,0.5388481],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9939903,0.0003261547,0.00016096859,0.0009874053,0.0027999706,0.0017352788],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99551576,0.00072258,0.00012214936,0.00009652622,0.0026630214,0.00087997626],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0029340284,0.00086734485,0.00090583524,0.001514469,0.026944928,0.008699944,0.0028072551,0.015157204,0.021015821],"category_scores_gemma":[0.010106145,0.0009616017,0.00084769214,0.0017662017,0.0041553974,0.0028649496,0.0014776974,0.018977568,0.0053558177],"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":[0.000007953663,0.000009084053,0.00031440897,0.0000249293,0.000004869903,0.00011198256,0.00024211568,0.000052032097,0.00008722974,0.022882262,0.9702762,0.005986974],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001017582,0.0000058617215,0.0014738813,0.00015247588,0.00001264826,0.00007017935,0.0004740177,0.00017690379,0.0001597647,0.003101182,0.9943223,0.000040678362],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9371382,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9758834,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94018626,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.05981376,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.11828228,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.43398124},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1560945108","doi":"","title":"A Regulatory Quick Fix for Carcieri v. Salazar: How the Department of Interior Can Invoke an Alternative Source of Existing Statutory Authority to Overcome an Adverse Judgment Under the Chevron Doctrine","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Administrative law review","topic":"Property Rights and Legal Doctrine","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":"Law; Statute; Jurisdiction; Supreme court; Political science; Statutory law; Doctrine; Legislation; Legislature; Government (linguistics); Federal jurisdiction","score_opus":0.22619924120204335,"score_gpt":0.3938734833854143,"score_spread":0.16767424218337093,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1560945108","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":[0.020614604,0.0057191234,0.08719124,0.32930717,0.00850719,0.00066695036,0.00020933754,0.002228687,0.54555565],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.57313377,0.0032449136,0.09042759,0.21830316,0.0033046375,0.0015298928,0.00025384527,0.0012201405,0.10858198],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9746967,0.009810384,0.00089765515,0.0044199517,0.006144251,0.004030974],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9814077,0.010830478,0.0008300056,0.0024393478,0.0027768796,0.001715694],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.04472075,0.0011957114,0.00097069156,0.0025338805,0.014213237,0.029058121,0.00790427,0.027490526,0.017163262],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05324104,0.0016826751,0.002271386,0.001039562,0.020623667,0.019082122,0.013794645,0.03385694,0.005223373],"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":[0.000042497984,0.000082885854,0.000403798,0.00005046823,0.000022027927,0.0003534142,0.0022425994,0.00075444,0.00060616276,0.9221402,0.05993327,0.013368287],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021507299,0.00020678635,0.00055408315,0.00078489527,0.0000932573,0.00026248433,0.004085251,0.002919983,0.0016997944,0.42533037,0.56354403,0.0003040003],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.023367567,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03587318,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04472075,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.013122049,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.027988652,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23650879},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2354679302","doi":"","title":"The Defects of Emergency Plans in China and Its Perfection","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Administrative law review","topic":"Safety and Risk Management","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","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":"China; Plan (archaeology); Emergency plan; Business; Perfection; Emergency management; Emergency response; Medical emergency; Emergency department; Operations management; Political science; Medicine; Engineering; Law; Geography; Nursing","score_opus":0.0491167018982027,"score_gpt":0.2935329469964458,"score_spread":0.24441624509824308,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2354679302","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":[0.7017809,0.007814176,0.006732657,0.049122132,0.00049559935,0.00027856338,0.0006678645,0.0002790497,0.23282906],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9794749,0.0013486113,0.0014490042,0.0006936808,0.00008039623,0.000033740864,0.00015149437,0.000021026159,0.016747093],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99268687,0.0011376267,0.0005508505,0.0005086854,0.0040450813,0.0010708682],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9905951,0.0016012539,0.0016255727,0.0015068102,0.004043628,0.0006276756],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0084279915,0.00022655637,0.00032964634,0.0028982316,0.003615723,0.004994013,0.0012309514,0.0009070496,0.0027254946],"category_scores_gemma":[0.014199279,0.00046176938,0.00033951097,0.0032909517,0.005984064,0.0037709393,0.0024312262,0.0013338475,0.00018594418],"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":[0.00008513466,0.00005775241,0.07651361,0.00025311488,0.000046742578,0.0014163007,0.010133057,0.004961637,0.0004630012,0.73167336,0.03656141,0.1378349],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000780649,0.00018490503,0.27543387,0.00043295644,0.000114610055,0.0011315086,0.011342735,0.0131733045,0.0025426976,0.13628577,0.5590371,0.00024236285],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.15876818,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.13726032,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15876818,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.013054635,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.032479715,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.31568807},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}