{"meta":{"query_hash":"a418229c28ac","filters":{"venue":"Cogency"},"cohort_total":6,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":6,"exported":6,"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/a418229c28ac","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Cogency"},"results":[{"id":"W2800557704","doi":"","title":"Depicting Visual Arguments: An ART Approach","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cogency","topic":"Language, Metaphor, and Cognition","field":"Psychology","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":"Trent University","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Computer science; Argument map; Key (lock); Epistemology; Artificial intelligence; Philosophy","score_opus":0.045060525917095806,"score_gpt":0.35903240672919123,"score_spread":0.3139718808120954,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2800557704","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":[0.018820355,0.003998545,0.68109405,0.012525584,0.001034447,0.000121048135,0.00014865157,0.00042109907,0.28183618],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6468627,0.0028205942,0.31186977,0.00201578,0.0011384629,0.0005120572,0.00019012835,0.00052325684,0.034067288],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9950265,0.0034931276,0.00012379997,0.00032143714,0.0008458748,0.00018924088],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99214923,0.0062039783,0.00040545067,0.0006816564,0.00044513657,0.00011444553],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0052156337,0.0010082859,0.00060550094,0.005242906,0.0032723616,0.01429546,0.0024481928,0.0035878993,0.00985413],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011920631,0.0005389757,0.0018131825,0.0022556817,0.022394624,0.016236557,0.003664664,0.003999239,0.001304608],"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":[0.00001114671,0.000007598555,0.00006382903,0.00006651204,0.000008830851,0.000057020094,0.003087695,0.00071840506,0.00027685481,0.9873825,0.0012291957,0.007090326],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000009522596,0.00001351646,0.00013019501,0.00012049916,0.0000113126225,0.00012546289,0.0021042512,0.0036962596,0.00049569266,0.93534106,0.057936363,0.000015896494],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009798398,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011330934,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01429546,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0030365186,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00094844913,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.032965362},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2900268178","doi":"","title":"Aproximación a la investigación sobre diálogos argumentativos","year":2018,"lang":"es","type":"article","venue":"Cogency","topic":"Social Sciences and Policies","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":"Argumentative; Argumentation theory; Epistemology; Logos Bible Software; Property (philosophy); Flexibility (engineering); Modal; Computer science; Sociology; Philosophy; Mathematics","score_opus":0.030363769835443914,"score_gpt":0.37095208248112965,"score_spread":0.34058831264568573,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2900268178","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":[0.027032474,0.32853845,0.22291148,0.13291097,0.014926982,0.0002625044,0.00029140536,0.0004793403,0.27264646],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.50378054,0.24332964,0.1447462,0.016076164,0.024085075,0.000806687,0.0005857707,0.0003275557,0.066262424],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9898957,0.007393474,0.00027092878,0.0007853446,0.0013034118,0.00035116405],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.985307,0.011017962,0.0005172224,0.001048085,0.0017106617,0.00039917562],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.011327011,0.0010688092,0.0011674261,0.0040952144,0.0027973598,0.013176903,0.0018659986,0.0062259785,0.0064145736],"category_scores_gemma":[0.016093584,0.0004245352,0.0012042377,0.0037783072,0.00895526,0.0130294645,0.0042481637,0.007913058,0.0014397572],"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":[0.000056505723,0.00006759375,0.00032530059,0.0008075062,0.000029303576,0.0002214674,0.005841782,0.0007559618,0.0006014467,0.9234426,0.009403563,0.05844691],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000027267895,0.00004977424,0.0006051779,0.0020381191,0.000044694167,0.00040977882,0.005889846,0.00308282,0.0006761744,0.5403923,0.44674957,0.000034437253],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003023862,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0025075853,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.013176903,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0056219418,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0039712964,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05990368},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2982205312","doi":"","title":"Hans V. Hansen, Ed., Riel’s Defence: Perspectives on His Speeches, McGill-Queens University Press, 2014, 331 pp., $32.95 (pbk), ISBN 97807773543362","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cogency","topic":"Military History and Strategy","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":"Media studies; Sociology; Philosophy; Art","score_opus":0.02224501807989796,"score_gpt":0.25009341873064694,"score_spread":0.227848400650749,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2982205312","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":[0.00019483642,0.9647331,0.00022389847,0.013767662,0.002915986,0.000003180543,0.00008626534,0.000032817785,0.018042237],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.008194955,0.92552024,0.0006698007,0.002524733,0.002590024,0.000015707774,0.00016588447,0.000082758816,0.06023606],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9991185,0.00030276657,0.000060411705,0.00011199608,0.00030880823,0.00009755429],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989672,0.0006257459,0.000098446566,0.000032464697,0.0001365422,0.00013955084],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0019503625,0.0014466026,0.00091342145,0.0025166639,0.0014987756,0.0046989005,0.0011623207,0.0025559391,0.028703697],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0028249854,0.0007534835,0.0003100188,0.0043288255,0.002127381,0.0054056486,0.0012822308,0.0025247915,0.0191496],"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":[0.000040936146,0.000011496421,0.0001513486,0.0009138163,0.000010499344,0.00013059912,0.002140928,0.00013172375,0.00011570308,0.011594151,0.85565656,0.12910213],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000002899854,0.000005533141,0.00041868177,0.00091312116,0.0000030936924,0.00016253929,0.0010756796,0.000025116748,0.000047980815,0.002488182,0.9948488,0.000008420217],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02135873,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.042647813,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.028703697,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0030471322,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004160517,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09602338},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2998568607","doi":"","title":"Collateral Beliefs and the Rashomon Effect","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cogency","topic":"Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics","field":"Arts and Humanities","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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Collateral; Argumentation theory; Cognition; Psychology; Work (physics); Social psychology; Rash; Epistemology; Political science; Law; Medicine; Philosophy; Engineering","score_opus":0.020396544838116714,"score_gpt":0.22962599050379426,"score_spread":0.20922944566567755,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2998568607","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":[0.4373557,0.001728503,0.03741233,0.021463068,0.00026354674,0.000108761145,0.0002575694,0.0001852874,0.50122523],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.995194,0.00018207546,0.0017115608,0.00035266706,0.000035266352,0.00002571914,0.000024717538,0.000018609653,0.0024553956],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9961473,0.002296779,0.0001562381,0.0005376797,0.00061456265,0.0002475069],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97855264,0.014634154,0.0022948137,0.002929055,0.0010684314,0.0005209813],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004704419,0.00033172203,0.00033436177,0.0011003808,0.002206341,0.0030648396,0.0008055726,0.00203378,0.014687354],"category_scores_gemma":[0.036292434,0.00039227091,0.00029186718,0.00078185543,0.012805254,0.008013139,0.0067172125,0.002953704,0.0006652504],"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":[0.00024841333,0.000041200197,0.0068459073,0.00018991895,0.000034584635,0.00065202394,0.03401606,0.00033761663,0.0017137259,0.93080777,0.0022567452,0.022856195],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012231342,0.000116848256,0.015704995,0.00036866797,0.000074673706,0.0010542443,0.02167433,0.0014918727,0.00166703,0.90544635,0.052198347,0.000080251215],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0016974146,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00241389,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.014687354,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014915484,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008235022,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.049134135},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3207571416","doi":"","title":"Studying Argumentation Behaviour / Estudiando el comportamiento argumentativo","year":2017,"lang":"es","type":"article","venue":"Cogency","topic":"Higher Education Teaching and Evaluation","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":"Argumentation theory; Panacea (medicine); Humanities; Political science; Politics; Epistemology; Dialogical self; Philosophy; Sociology; Law","score_opus":0.08290131220310663,"score_gpt":0.4568799103540673,"score_spread":0.37397859815096063,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3207571416","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":[0.9504093,0.0005272611,0.01643192,0.0006163184,0.000039277573,0.00016061458,0.00010089264,0.000055979028,0.031658363],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99202955,0.00014911112,0.0052590175,0.000046836558,0.000012950272,0.00008537958,0.000073405936,0.00001808747,0.0023255867],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99231625,0.005043532,0.0004148205,0.00062302826,0.001354295,0.00024795686],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96969414,0.020973194,0.003972885,0.0013487547,0.0029182683,0.0010926592],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007308532,0.0003283319,0.00037140332,0.0024735266,0.0013127726,0.006161591,0.0007217777,0.0014413443,0.0026778856],"category_scores_gemma":[0.034822457,0.00023790594,0.0004330282,0.0018543431,0.0014744463,0.0035354106,0.0017618296,0.0011323915,0.0010100189],"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":[0.0015676346,0.0018024548,0.3507582,0.0016973934,0.0003295786,0.0014706004,0.2285784,0.0040931944,0.029157951,0.110995494,0.0030560063,0.2664931],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021305351,0.0018821346,0.4748847,0.0017824689,0.00035412185,0.0028558788,0.18235877,0.04359393,0.035249356,0.17530438,0.08124566,0.00027562337],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004956451,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004509638,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.007308532,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0014341528,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011050728,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.038651645},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4412992671","doi":"10.32995/cogency.v16i2.435","title":"Revisting Kant and Husserl on the Copernican Turn","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cogency","topic":"Philosophy and Historical Thought","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"Copernican principle; Philosophy; Epistemology; Turn (biochemistry); Physics","score_opus":0.04803846954802803,"score_gpt":0.23304204641811058,"score_spread":0.18500357687008254,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4412992671","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":[0.05989071,0.019104885,0.028593728,0.12541227,0.002504549,0.000041976095,0.000105929386,0.00014750003,0.76419854],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94860005,0.004690548,0.0047985907,0.010612914,0.0010068257,0.000066946195,0.000040627543,0.00013121263,0.030052196],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9942715,0.0038354278,0.00011615699,0.0005530975,0.000866879,0.000356951],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9946126,0.0037984198,0.00036154443,0.0005826232,0.0004450492,0.00019984097],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0076840804,0.0005516636,0.000549546,0.002497786,0.0047171894,0.0077577797,0.0012033324,0.0039444645,0.0041167466],"category_scores_gemma":[0.005923163,0.00047565205,0.00041076713,0.0016565424,0.074986316,0.010061607,0.006428297,0.007980985,0.00061675464],"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":[0.000008991421,0.000004487531,0.000049014096,0.000016033682,0.0000019240738,0.000032293745,0.0042564617,0.00011609965,0.000022675402,0.992504,0.0018727055,0.001115245],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000012522835,0.0000075024846,0.00023499235,0.00022808628,0.0000059726435,0.000056627538,0.00391462,0.00035085692,0.00016705364,0.8931835,0.10182164,0.000016714774],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005587503,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005933167,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.012150466,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012150466,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004452726,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08815819},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}