{"meta":{"query_hash":"01faf2ac840f","filters":{"venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law"},"cohort_total":20,"direct_labels_cover":1,"predictions_cover":20,"exported":20,"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/01faf2ac840f","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Duke+journal+of+comparative+%26+international+law"},"results":[{"id":"W1494523486","doi":"","title":"Defendant Class Actions and the Right to Opt Out: Lessons for Canada from the United States","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Dispute Resolution and Class Actions","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","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":"Class action; Class (philosophy); Opt-out; Political science; Law; Action (physics); Certification; Opt-in email; State (computer science); Business; Computer security; Computer science","score_opus":0.044019117962477754,"score_gpt":0.30584001703688674,"score_spread":0.261820899074409,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1494523486","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":[0.3936021,0.01587137,0.0016165476,0.2125729,0.0007313453,0.00012433433,0.00096161815,0.000039131668,0.3744806],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94347,0.004076736,0.00054777967,0.01546552,0.000104811326,0.000039320144,0.00017510913,0.0000427724,0.03607789],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99080944,0.0012923458,0.0002272863,0.0005745863,0.0017917634,0.005304528],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9860702,0.004067989,0.0006435118,0.00048574505,0.0056128614,0.0031197746],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0062164594,0.00041463063,0.0011438843,0.0024242662,0.037830964,0.01587204,0.0035872057,0.010936817,0.012645092],"category_scores_gemma":[0.021417383,0.0005394231,0.00095602474,0.0042131287,0.018327618,0.004682916,0.005187451,0.014828102,0.00059339305],"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":[0.00024594137,0.00017726915,0.035507504,0.0001461682,0.00010595788,0.0010307563,0.051662017,0.0013791872,0.000250474,0.7642408,0.0918454,0.05340856],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00032256174,0.000116306546,0.1371044,0.00268139,0.0005161911,0.0004479014,0.19767724,0.0030521932,0.0010849935,0.14278108,0.5136394,0.0005762923],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9972537,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9991284,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.14446826,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.14446826,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.22942862,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99229556},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1501055903","doi":"","title":"Banking on Cooperation: The Role of the G-20 in Improving the International Financial Architecture","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Global Financial Regulation and Crises","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","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":"Mandate; Corporate governance; Architecture; Financial crisis; Financial regulation; Global governance; Finance; Political science; Business; Economics; Public administration; Law","score_opus":0.024397804667076285,"score_gpt":0.24708330499285483,"score_spread":0.22268550032577855,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1501055903","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":[0.036784448,0.010007124,0.0037116902,0.73275375,0.0050096405,0.000063032036,0.000071481074,0.00021782509,0.21138102],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8325269,0.009772857,0.0061968258,0.11812119,0.003200858,0.00010623815,0.00010232424,0.00014728143,0.029825447],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9924905,0.004156472,0.00019308433,0.00054636603,0.00095930835,0.0016543209],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9919435,0.001784081,0.0006971686,0.00050412904,0.0011663146,0.003904873],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012222337,0.0005579968,0.00022726125,0.0012472264,0.0050633145,0.01523908,0.0014380396,0.008823853,0.010931723],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012703347,0.00021612739,0.00023558416,0.001388171,0.015536791,0.010475055,0.01279386,0.006045539,0.0017150342],"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":[0.00007139603,0.000053845542,0.0027426835,0.00017026762,0.000007779538,0.00035299704,0.005906469,0.00057853624,0.00030053404,0.70500016,0.20579968,0.079015635],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000028422386,0.000110552,0.0067374157,0.00071073964,0.000008361204,0.00022789155,0.009711696,0.00071714417,0.00027755366,0.26115385,0.72027016,0.00004622706],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0058513503,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006926698,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01523908,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0066483617,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0143615585,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.064638674},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1505551132","doi":"","title":"Class Actions: The Canadian Experience","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Dispute Resolution and Class Actions","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":12,"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":"Class action; Punitive damages; Damages; Political science; Civil procedure; Commission; Economic Justice; Law; Class (philosophy); State (computer science)","score_opus":0.07552962021589309,"score_gpt":0.3288667592884061,"score_spread":0.253337139072513,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1505551132","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":[0.13107462,0.019760739,0.0009846652,0.20898952,0.004442098,0.00025762996,0.0015800159,0.00014108949,0.63276964],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6524788,0.023915878,0.001273864,0.054432143,0.0007286666,0.00015740002,0.00079531554,0.00032734603,0.26589066],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9883321,0.0011706555,0.00022588238,0.001013806,0.003822388,0.0054352633],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98479986,0.001255033,0.00047879163,0.00049534405,0.003138582,0.009832429],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0068152994,0.0007301658,0.0008835706,0.0022528418,0.066295445,0.0126726795,0.004586839,0.005560108,0.038536962],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012069728,0.00075777946,0.0009285932,0.0064424407,0.01848285,0.0047740713,0.009493723,0.010645648,0.0026867164],"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":[0.00014217911,0.00043623536,0.017637385,0.00033251426,0.000041447413,0.002175687,0.15944529,0.0002509667,0.0003144935,0.216615,0.46509084,0.13751802],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000020958067,0.00002890655,0.0094978595,0.00025911527,0.000016567183,0.0002865523,0.050195284,0.00008442847,0.000073895055,0.0028104458,0.93666,0.0000658949],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.99292326,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9965682,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15664287,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.15664287,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.3028176,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.97817475},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1512500917","doi":"","title":"Canada/United States Military Interoperability and Humanitarian Law Issues: Land Mines, Terrorism, Military Objectives and Targeted Killing","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Military and Defense Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":13,"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":"International humanitarian law; Terrorism; Law; Political science; Geneva Conventions; International law; Municipal law; Human rights","score_opus":0.02247084032529224,"score_gpt":0.3083153047281898,"score_spread":0.28584446440289757,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1512500917","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":[0.10722181,0.025341138,0.0014216218,0.25171444,0.0009872863,0.000054925476,0.00042641556,0.00002938581,0.612803],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9399311,0.0084891915,0.0007414736,0.020723835,0.00028359616,0.000028222166,0.00012844417,0.000026529267,0.02964759],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99690694,0.00062966684,0.00007210506,0.00013798347,0.00089738896,0.0013558661],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99527645,0.0015024304,0.0003929052,0.00010255583,0.0016498562,0.0010756685],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0030877697,0.00032145373,0.0003480517,0.0025892437,0.012638074,0.012562434,0.0013474533,0.0039235335,0.013876236],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0051865135,0.00018038867,0.00046862572,0.0043574455,0.018066501,0.005984884,0.0033045246,0.0047604223,0.00035060887],"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":[0.000045256682,0.000064954744,0.009791808,0.00010920146,0.000028009968,0.000352627,0.012653019,0.00036942237,0.00013306575,0.89249283,0.060882147,0.023077574],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000053962693,0.00006869796,0.0991985,0.0013987739,0.00013710996,0.00031457903,0.1901272,0.001578757,0.00064016774,0.2392785,0.46704707,0.00015672285],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9373551,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9726732,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9412658,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.05873418,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.076331064,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4261483},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1515053903","doi":"","title":"Interoperability of United States and Canadian Armed Forces","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Military and Defense Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"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":"Infantry; General partnership; Terrorism; National security; Law; Political science; Public administration","score_opus":0.036157243099489415,"score_gpt":0.341010317478981,"score_spread":0.30485307437949155,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1515053903","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":[0.085959435,0.0027796472,0.0023445436,0.006410656,0.00018491349,0.00008880152,0.0014360036,0.000111580135,0.9006845],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9662624,0.0020787981,0.0021184871,0.001220869,0.000042209405,0.000056058063,0.0012730685,0.00005774516,0.026890375],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99332243,0.00049023645,0.00020726833,0.000573751,0.003586794,0.0018195892],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99278533,0.0006914467,0.0003292973,0.0004915086,0.005152695,0.0005498486],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0037323318,0.0002879526,0.00026689513,0.0049818773,0.00905695,0.008575697,0.0014784173,0.0011295666,0.009022854],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015207297,0.00020830591,0.00053022796,0.0075518354,0.0035487453,0.0036233552,0.0038144507,0.0012942016,0.00055677595],"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":[0.00014091545,0.00003479835,0.037386555,0.00013344585,0.0000705809,0.0002929738,0.015345944,0.0025250781,0.0005104411,0.7830602,0.039547753,0.1209513],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000406299,0.000051414427,0.19143283,0.00070332084,0.00015764339,0.00032203595,0.03518917,0.0071801925,0.00113984,0.065093204,0.69844586,0.00024388242],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9831523,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.983051,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94490445,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.055095576,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.05810069,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.39974827},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1524727478","doi":"","title":"A Comparative Analysis of the Standard of Fraud Required Under the Fraud Rule in Letter of Credit Law","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Law, logistics, and international trade","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":20,"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":"Letter of credit; Payment; Issuer; Position (finance); Commission; Constructive fraud; Business; Law; Obligation; Scope (computer science); Securities fraud; Accounting; Law and economics; Economics; Actuarial science; Political science; Finance; Supreme court; Computer science","score_opus":0.0551072959462793,"score_gpt":0.3083150857105404,"score_spread":0.2532077897642611,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1524727478","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":[0.5554009,0.003948394,0.009809331,0.0077094254,0.00034542626,0.0002919425,0.0003492277,0.00006883065,0.42207655],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9916779,0.00072348374,0.0014872754,0.0011131075,0.00015629306,0.0000840705,0.00009879716,0.000023017066,0.0046360423],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9500188,0.019603912,0.0034279514,0.0021989315,0.020319274,0.004431037],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.87553734,0.076579146,0.017933419,0.007562467,0.019553294,0.0028343296],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.018710496,0.0002798799,0.00081582996,0.0063676327,0.0039985077,0.013845648,0.0016598683,0.0042177923,0.0067311204],"category_scores_gemma":[0.115985185,0.00054623873,0.0013672516,0.005930954,0.012919341,0.008464252,0.0043924027,0.005396033,0.00089848274],"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":[0.00042295537,0.00025377574,0.02339957,0.00019673829,0.00007816698,0.00059521705,0.0052075232,0.0010765404,0.00070536707,0.9432292,0.0035978267,0.02123706],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00041675277,0.0024778284,0.4036422,0.0016402979,0.0006024221,0.0023349847,0.030937782,0.008663372,0.007412383,0.41122296,0.13013384,0.00051520916],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008183408,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008592246,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.018710496,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011144691,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0049918266,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09895176},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1528881838","doi":"","title":"Siting Foreign Law: How Derrida Can Help","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":13,"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":"Institution; Judaism; Sociology; Law; Classics; History; Political science; Archaeology","score_opus":0.09109940972700245,"score_gpt":0.3394804521501871,"score_spread":0.24838104242318462,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1528881838","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":[0.006066304,0.015512323,0.0014251331,0.6598805,0.01217656,0.000059543287,0.00007468203,0.000422107,0.3043828],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.087635376,0.01046083,0.003700873,0.30177623,0.002401824,0.00013175169,0.00019934423,0.0007731217,0.59292066],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9962167,0.001955184,0.0000970458,0.00037057127,0.00049209624,0.00086839736],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99551964,0.0010619735,0.00014113645,0.00024146833,0.0006646389,0.002371186],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00554408,0.0007699303,0.000486105,0.0009035467,0.018751517,0.015401923,0.002531722,0.010511143,0.06343011],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009738266,0.00044053362,0.00053460215,0.0006887311,0.009950285,0.016976425,0.009377044,0.013675361,0.026466403],"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":[0.00001749573,0.00010538203,0.00092891,0.0001000986,0.000008039854,0.0010271085,0.030173773,0.000048959453,0.00013978557,0.05846032,0.85278666,0.05620355],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000052797354,0.000010782643,0.00025695938,0.00019224918,0.0000022773004,0.00027721343,0.026781112,0.000036150912,0.00004548086,0.005660525,0.96672016,0.0000118551625],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.020779468,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.052184965,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06343011,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006023368,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008451311,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2121948},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1544132179","doi":"","title":"Reconsidering Res Judicata: A Comparative Perspective","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":57,"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":"Res judicata; Scope (computer science); Doctrine; Law; Adversary; Political science; Action (physics); Law and economics; Perspective (graphical); Sociology; Computer science; Computer security","score_opus":0.25700860748035,"score_gpt":0.3939149846991725,"score_spread":0.13690637721882254,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1544132179","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":[0.011509591,0.041536007,0.0015421361,0.06892095,0.0015865499,0.00002499092,0.000042124568,0.0000187862,0.87481904],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8288515,0.033351075,0.001253758,0.0514243,0.008731769,0.0001572189,0.000086191096,0.00009759124,0.07604666],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9864281,0.0075501506,0.00026670255,0.0011199428,0.0021248779,0.0025102173],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98581034,0.010834867,0.00072883023,0.00041736691,0.0015635416,0.0006450108],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.011996257,0.0006199208,0.0008966108,0.0048899557,0.015728544,0.022954585,0.0037915837,0.020462705,0.0148002645],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012692927,0.00053024484,0.0010339525,0.005073192,0.038957614,0.015756628,0.0050570513,0.01570348,0.0014655504],"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":[0.000006261963,0.000009828132,0.00007044608,0.000028145707,0.0000026216437,0.00010537225,0.002375741,0.000046683494,0.000032843618,0.9917169,0.003996411,0.0016087138],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000041271072,0.00009313885,0.0022435677,0.00088685,0.000035818342,0.00028915587,0.026398417,0.0004788544,0.00024255246,0.351124,0.6181023,0.000064145635],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.045916364,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.07902678,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.045916364,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03142516,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.010147052,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2280066},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1566065845","doi":"","title":"HIV/AIDS and Blood Donation Policies: A Comparative Study of Public Health Policies and Individual Rights Norms","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Sex work and related issues","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":"Human rights; Public health; Donation; Health policy; Political science; Right to health; Economic growth; Public policy; Public administration; Health care; Medicine; Law; Economics","score_opus":0.10441625188159497,"score_gpt":0.3760002981467664,"score_spread":0.2715840462651714,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1566065845","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":[0.9282545,0.0032142221,0.00042298165,0.006145963,0.000034023673,0.000028714678,0.000057150362,0.0000037422883,0.061838742],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9980744,0.00094040064,0.00009234569,0.00027623336,0.000012355044,0.000014445971,0.000015171911,0.0000021249446,0.00057235674],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9918389,0.005920007,0.00013216239,0.00018280915,0.0008996886,0.0010264452],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98198086,0.014303012,0.0017577825,0.00034628806,0.0010273462,0.00058473373],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010348771,0.00008991687,0.00020737234,0.0016185058,0.0029174238,0.0036079045,0.00053140527,0.0010267925,0.0032513677],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02188294,0.00015844588,0.00014792927,0.0026191566,0.0068498733,0.0031407764,0.001791459,0.0013485008,0.00007212313],"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":[0.00046282064,0.0010418873,0.11736061,0.0003724702,0.0000973696,0.0006924305,0.206533,0.0015477738,0.0003458811,0.578444,0.0036656882,0.089436084],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011111623,0.0006253296,0.3947329,0.0014062464,0.000104148865,0.00067977485,0.44102737,0.0020703461,0.0010569161,0.055838052,0.102256745,0.00009101499],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.042096123,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04788047,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.042096123,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007302197,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006658355,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08370221},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1591907128","doi":"","title":"Lining-Up at the Border: Renewing the Call for a Canada-U.S. Insolvency Convention in the 21st Century","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Corporate Insolvency and Governance","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":"Insolvency; Convention; International trade; Political science; Business; Law","score_opus":0.027603103053783114,"score_gpt":0.27681281337505614,"score_spread":0.24920971032127304,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1591907128","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":[0.059185144,0.0093696285,0.0031912713,0.71361053,0.0047913305,0.000044869787,0.00024713774,0.0001473414,0.20941277],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5897507,0.007031711,0.004827702,0.28123617,0.0011218915,0.00004203053,0.00027673272,0.00021872453,0.11549428],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99323684,0.00048352897,0.000101763646,0.00045561048,0.002834598,0.0028877172],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99086094,0.0008562633,0.0003486503,0.00033117132,0.0034972192,0.0041057114],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00442107,0.00026079416,0.0004977728,0.0011433624,0.022248222,0.019215554,0.002404463,0.012600702,0.008968507],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015428419,0.00030272163,0.0004348885,0.0019784076,0.014338944,0.006511524,0.0057047578,0.014137194,0.0008098164],"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":[0.000039751743,0.000042578547,0.0035659715,0.000051718434,0.000010541322,0.0005372672,0.008368933,0.0005357506,0.0007805562,0.541008,0.40210932,0.042949535],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000029379155,0.00002215746,0.0075535434,0.00029481755,0.000016896938,0.00014196627,0.01456883,0.00059834815,0.00045454252,0.041995287,0.9342459,0.000078314006],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9586597,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98357576,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.064022414,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.064022414,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.19396906,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4645173},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1592699941","doi":"","title":"The NSA Phone Call Database: The Problematic Acquisition and Mining of Call Records in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Terrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"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":"United States National Security Agency; Government (linguistics); National security; Warrant; Call to action; Political science; Phone; Business; Computer security; Law; Advertising; Finance; Computer science","score_opus":0.07208240911005974,"score_gpt":0.37414700316749955,"score_spread":0.3020645940574398,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1592699941","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":[0.90701234,0.0019401544,0.004214685,0.0052269893,0.00013934157,0.00026382637,0.06508778,0.0008615616,0.015253322],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9093138,0.001747838,0.013677957,0.00060175837,0.00006004867,0.000141542,0.0682217,0.0002166862,0.0060186936],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9948513,0.0007100573,0.00055671047,0.00048299436,0.003000372,0.00039858345],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96961784,0.009275269,0.0036755218,0.003030184,0.012832259,0.0015688599],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0037643318,0.0001883977,0.00033496096,0.007019834,0.0025555221,0.0028678526,0.0011701749,0.0008549393,0.00088123867],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02810611,0.0002471584,0.00016551494,0.014440379,0.0009044144,0.0014766734,0.0013643457,0.0010550462,0.00090618705],"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":[0.00025441404,0.00017065914,0.59410995,0.00040887712,0.000104757804,0.0009175845,0.014609819,0.0019388266,0.0019034111,0.0063899416,0.12591608,0.25327575],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000017489074,0.00003206479,0.85858303,0.00024080677,0.00007013432,0.0004302792,0.012107204,0.020153368,0.0028580632,0.0012816886,0.10413374,0.000092093345],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.82939065,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8833694,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.17060935,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008801694,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01701836,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.34322816},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1593179291","doi":"","title":"The Priority Rules of the United Nations Receivables Convention","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Law, logistics, and international trade","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","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":"Accounts receivable; Convention; Bankruptcy; Debtor; International trade law; Law; Statutory law; Conflict of laws; Letter of credit; Business; Law and economics; Economics; Political science; Creditor; Finance","score_opus":0.07232836053494365,"score_gpt":0.2889957975240048,"score_spread":0.21666743698906113,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1593179291","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":[0.0033030165,0.0060995887,0.041353043,0.009746914,0.004891673,0.00084303855,0.0013446657,0.00040516822,0.93201286],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.2013278,0.017615937,0.20673162,0.027946817,0.0076229563,0.0051051048,0.0052940096,0.0009716127,0.52738416],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.96590513,0.006659509,0.004271174,0.0032367713,0.017409934,0.0025174967],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9857351,0.0043801516,0.0010219938,0.0025527708,0.005663994,0.0006458793],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.017826116,0.0012647002,0.0010405995,0.0033041774,0.0046743313,0.016694829,0.004194728,0.009107894,0.013905302],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02734313,0.0012741485,0.0012209319,0.002958343,0.007105509,0.00806309,0.004031687,0.011899308,0.008199942],"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":[0.0000152005705,0.000023820623,0.00013077575,0.00007290807,0.0000042614365,0.00005977275,0.00031192682,0.00043935134,0.00018429503,0.9549456,0.03003558,0.013776529],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000024125566,0.00003598506,0.00035040616,0.00062094006,0.000011094263,0.00011617317,0.00019346109,0.00063432753,0.0005400365,0.20884109,0.78856444,0.00006795658],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.031554043,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.029305678,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.031554043,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006417224,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.019923225,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09427458},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1594403803","doi":"","title":"The Law and Politics of the Pinochet Case","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"International Law and Human Rights","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":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Political science; Politics; Human rights; Jurisdiction; International law","score_opus":0.02956073755263248,"score_gpt":0.3427954605210797,"score_spread":0.3132347229684472,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1594403803","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":[0.15425728,0.0029408373,0.0010820258,0.035361286,0.00039342395,0.0001033792,0.000042829284,0.000024070276,0.80579495],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9239655,0.00089620304,0.00023981131,0.0101809455,0.00013685478,0.00017705037,0.000022322036,0.000021504924,0.06435992],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9934628,0.0017781662,0.00008264624,0.0008560145,0.00081152096,0.0030089442],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983115,0.0009773826,0.00019960143,0.00010631246,0.000108172375,0.00029697703],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003706441,0.00034321132,0.00038748627,0.001290056,0.02717936,0.012954293,0.0019086528,0.007940935,0.008719117],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0093111,0.0007023404,0.00029100748,0.001663819,0.025916036,0.005882418,0.012244568,0.01238547,0.0005239744],"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":[0.00003048854,0.000018906623,0.0010193263,0.000025998123,0.000004424165,0.002445816,0.011220729,0.00017625591,0.0000868734,0.97392106,0.008744228,0.0023059226],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001300346,0.00009075654,0.015374982,0.0010238877,0.000050523977,0.0030000084,0.09228133,0.0015585086,0.0010716142,0.33738115,0.5478415,0.00019574456],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06588258,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.07909228,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06588258,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0139565375,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007874538,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1309982},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2130157079","doi":"","title":"Foreword: Debates Over Group Litigation in Comparative Perspective: What Can We Learn From Each Other","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":6,"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":"Class action; Damages; Enforcement; Law and economics; Law; Business; Economics; Political science","score_opus":0.05096546427562636,"score_gpt":0.28805598858852627,"score_spread":0.2370905243128999,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2130157079","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":[0.0013978414,0.107124485,0.0011367459,0.77469134,0.015640823,0.000020214426,0.00007477665,0.000020486596,0.09989327],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1505372,0.17630999,0.002957216,0.50923765,0.13268463,0.00035020467,0.000252325,0.00024359673,0.027427133],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9880954,0.007658523,0.0003985979,0.0011414973,0.0017132278,0.0009927505],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.93163204,0.05860514,0.0018980856,0.0013833678,0.0043147295,0.0021665832],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.017101454,0.0009835515,0.0020899533,0.0063179047,0.012414743,0.022752518,0.0062556164,0.021936476,0.02305166],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0427973,0.0004457312,0.0011857739,0.0089583155,0.04265017,0.043803286,0.005996728,0.021200737,0.0033938147],"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":[0.000031290492,0.00003490241,0.00023348506,0.00056463614,0.000015328213,0.00014685593,0.008040537,0.00009301603,0.000027161186,0.79013926,0.18428518,0.01638838],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000019850559,0.000034767887,0.0011006008,0.0039359042,0.000016156931,0.00022742039,0.02628948,0.0001833003,0.000047078243,0.3398467,0.6282583,0.00004046973],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01189155,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.012223616,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02305166,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01388327,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007336757,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10073066},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2884602605","doi":"","title":"Best Interest of a Minor Theist: An American and Religiously Informed Response to Canada’s A.C. v. Manitoba","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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":"Minor (academic); Political science; Law","score_opus":0.05154950500784888,"score_gpt":0.37081973341951163,"score_spread":0.31927022841166275,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2884602605","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":[0.06952853,0.0052529126,0.0006855315,0.7303813,0.0030768956,0.00016783242,0.00028718656,0.000078859164,0.19054094],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.2761146,0.0020616334,0.00065291085,0.55136883,0.00057829556,0.0001029297,0.00007489309,0.00007198559,0.16897394],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9960645,0.0005884095,0.000077054334,0.0002486714,0.0009706008,0.0020507937],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9957424,0.001264898,0.00016288772,0.000087342814,0.0012773182,0.0014651392],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0035242403,0.0005508801,0.0003554095,0.0005834008,0.04027971,0.005106396,0.0030611272,0.02085222,0.0060981573],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0077914475,0.00084715517,0.0005176634,0.0008235823,0.007233103,0.001260538,0.0027731603,0.020660939,0.00071828853],"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":[0.00010900783,0.00016494686,0.01076544,0.0001068016,0.000039074508,0.0051636426,0.061516054,0.00029008882,0.0021888334,0.16431774,0.739473,0.015865372],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000059228303,0.00004881605,0.011054103,0.00036163678,0.000059808277,0.00054448715,0.045749858,0.00046742562,0.0011095965,0.006617737,0.93378216,0.00014520052],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9588108,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9895299,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.046523705,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.046523705,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.10249331,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3375547},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121682222","doi":"","title":"Are Muslims the New Catholics? Europe’s Headscarf Laws in Comparative Historical Perspective","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Religious Freedom and Discrimination","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":"Law; Immigration; Political science; Population; Secularism; Sociology; Referendum; Politics","score_opus":0.14085115607918847,"score_gpt":0.3737837721688877,"score_spread":0.23293261608969923,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3121682222","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":[0.35307705,0.086315006,0.00039656129,0.026256323,0.0007231456,0.000011689458,0.00014676085,0.000009248744,0.53306425],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9755883,0.012691014,0.00011319276,0.0016086148,0.00044014174,0.0000043829864,0.000041874533,0.00000770005,0.0095047355],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992836,0.0003442749,0.000020899468,0.000099648365,0.000058118832,0.00019348091],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992306,0.00042199425,0.0001430544,0.000043692882,0.000055202327,0.00010544821],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016187439,0.00018206151,0.0001887296,0.0014848765,0.003779388,0.005152801,0.00037299577,0.0016183987,0.006159956],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011470065,0.00015820192,0.00009793472,0.002523418,0.010707185,0.003225724,0.0015287895,0.0018133793,0.0002358867],"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":[0.000037386326,0.000033281845,0.004262234,0.00012918121,0.000011315579,0.0005372581,0.12757063,0.00005992012,0.0001837044,0.83823436,0.0077515272,0.021189101],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000007613962,0.000051433013,0.037880316,0.0009471082,0.000010401844,0.0006472155,0.1273201,0.00007355272,0.00017867662,0.018732017,0.81413054,0.000020995756],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011182691,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.014335682,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.011182691,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002977928,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00065460993,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.022235215},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3125255200","doi":"","title":"Shift Happens: Pressure on Foreign Attorney-Fee Paradigms From Class Actions","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Dispute Resolution and Class Actions","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":9,"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":"Class action; Supreme court; Law; Government (linguistics); Political science; Liability; Civil procedure; Res judicata; State (computer science); Law and economics; Sociology","score_opus":0.05653539633804575,"score_gpt":0.29704541234216847,"score_spread":0.24051001600412272,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3125255200","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":[0.11046614,0.0035563698,0.005027847,0.23428984,0.0017952782,0.000038035007,0.00008578771,0.000068926645,0.64467174],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.940772,0.0011292293,0.0007568475,0.034836587,0.0007869819,0.000049285605,0.00003464142,0.000071597926,0.021562986],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9908819,0.002828773,0.00024499244,0.0013617525,0.0026300335,0.0020526084],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.990726,0.0054719993,0.0008218095,0.00080377737,0.0012927878,0.000883662],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00957227,0.0002490596,0.00036408487,0.0011590581,0.009573704,0.018523395,0.0015022649,0.007667083,0.009186404],"category_scores_gemma":[0.019199375,0.0002188547,0.0006309875,0.00136682,0.023824014,0.019394558,0.0069138855,0.012897456,0.001056634],"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":[0.0000143356565,0.000020928514,0.0011282316,0.000020114167,0.0000034334018,0.00010253154,0.011248212,0.000041465933,0.00013464733,0.9682049,0.010204351,0.008876954],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026443759,0.000058360845,0.0055544674,0.0003746149,0.000015405603,0.00023564685,0.057830274,0.000513175,0.0008322902,0.5113421,0.42314327,0.00007390805],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012885084,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.012151273,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.018523395,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01172529,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006606255,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08507335},"labels":[{"model":"gemma","categories":[],"domain":null,"study_design":"not_applicable","genre":"empirical","about_ca_system":false,"about_ca_topic":false,"confidence":"low"},{"model":"gpt","categories":[],"domain":null,"study_design":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre":"other","about_ca_system":false,"about_ca_topic":false,"confidence":"medium"}],"label_agreement":"split"},{"id":"W7026896640","doi":"","title":"The Basis of Unit Self-Defense and Implications for the Use of Force","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"World Wars: History, Literature, and Impact","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":"Commit; Unit (ring theory); Set (abstract data type); Government (linguistics)","score_opus":0.10596492253896475,"score_gpt":0.3763214579762302,"score_spread":0.27035653543726546,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7026896640","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":[0.07078575,0.0049448423,0.00838865,0.032484204,0.00032403963,0.00005546301,0.00007034515,0.000021295631,0.8829254],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9882783,0.0007119308,0.0006235029,0.0011649582,0.00014293064,0.000055961125,0.000019771029,0.000016309521,0.008986309],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9950877,0.0026847168,0.00014252216,0.0006287029,0.0005027418,0.0009537133],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99657565,0.0019973905,0.000332648,0.00048056472,0.00040129907,0.00021236831],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004365801,0.00041257113,0.00042423242,0.0022947132,0.010186457,0.00795278,0.0021018663,0.0064979037,0.009447859],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0085046375,0.00033713228,0.00048168848,0.0018831912,0.07645616,0.01048261,0.0058269524,0.0068341973,0.000748531],"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":[0.000003109247,0.000003327779,0.000109143904,0.0000049999826,8.4948437e-7,0.000041376687,0.0016968745,0.0000492312,0.000010720526,0.996924,0.0003688342,0.00078753475],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000012767405,0.000014455118,0.00075845513,0.00012070225,0.0000043767914,0.00009314471,0.0073412056,0.0003875582,0.00017136737,0.9452479,0.04583147,0.00001661066],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.011877306,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009781728,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.011877306,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008419878,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003917318,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.061090708},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W82930102","doi":"","title":"MISPLACED BOLDNESS: THE AVOIDANCE OF SUBSTANCE IN THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE'S KOSOVO OPINION","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Post-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics","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; International court; Political science; International law; Independence (probability theory); Public international law","score_opus":0.04087776638970086,"score_gpt":0.3618997799491497,"score_spread":0.3210220135594488,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W82930102","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":[0.15818521,0.012607263,0.0040041474,0.36716437,0.005492553,0.000056809116,0.00007003198,0.000048637172,0.45237103],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8914882,0.0015498522,0.0006485494,0.086847,0.0012779625,0.000040709947,0.000028881776,0.000055243894,0.018063612],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9879346,0.004374525,0.0005948866,0.0013577628,0.0032752343,0.002463009],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9957455,0.0023572876,0.00048664198,0.00021625642,0.0007436052,0.00045075556],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009956952,0.00034258727,0.00052242645,0.0013283569,0.014248208,0.016342029,0.0019286467,0.011543488,0.0011445611],"category_scores_gemma":[0.018377267,0.00043444952,0.0005810955,0.0011991303,0.027143255,0.0061241654,0.0062748743,0.02073481,0.00019785964],"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":[0.000018635417,0.000009734902,0.0007664118,0.00002316991,0.000009125448,0.0006874213,0.03860737,0.00008555843,0.00030086053,0.93773127,0.017812854,0.0039476994],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003839078,0.000055452485,0.005997233,0.0007964293,0.000056036843,0.0006328191,0.058793217,0.00068901875,0.00092347286,0.27172908,0.6600715,0.00021733459],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07700263,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.089571126,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07700263,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011923131,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009777101,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1531089},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W896809431","doi":"","title":"A State’s Right to Military Power: The International Legal Implications of Potential SDF Action","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Duke journal of comparative & international law","topic":"Military and Defense Studies","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":"Constitution; Law; State (computer science); Guard (computer science); Use of force; Political science; Rules of engagement; Power (physics); International law; Proportionality (law); Mathematics; Computer science","score_opus":0.030562137490161484,"score_gpt":0.3485913024835739,"score_spread":0.3180291649934124,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W896809431","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":[0.010722896,0.0025179435,0.0017948567,0.0949943,0.00043703706,0.000018397175,0.00009043877,0.000015726022,0.88940847],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9007666,0.0025118515,0.001323038,0.029583624,0.00080631947,0.00012641402,0.00008062191,0.000033257333,0.064768225],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9971391,0.0011224619,0.00011422118,0.00030317472,0.00040577984,0.0009152722],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974548,0.0016373222,0.00017393247,0.00017824983,0.0003182135,0.0002374547],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0037298575,0.0003345582,0.00027803413,0.0009840169,0.008153128,0.0088359965,0.0012095902,0.012641812,0.010258236],"category_scores_gemma":[0.005378009,0.00035075413,0.0005123275,0.0008469639,0.021922056,0.005385526,0.0042037168,0.008694946,0.000843293],"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":[0.0000020833838,0.0000032224318,0.00010253723,0.0000038235003,5.529654e-7,0.000042907694,0.00080581976,0.000029931784,0.000012883582,0.99423945,0.004126733,0.000630038],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000028868357,0.00002066019,0.0020036292,0.00054796523,0.000017191147,0.00027239413,0.007965114,0.00083784806,0.00036122708,0.69249296,0.29541764,0.000034459783],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02972191,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.045059778,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02972191,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004030548,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0049080853,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.059097826},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}