{"meta":{"query_hash":"bc3637c1182d","filters":{"venue":"Faculty publications"},"cohort_total":12,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":12,"exported":12,"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/bc3637c1182d","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Faculty+publications"},"results":[{"id":"W1535565003","doi":"","title":"An Analysis of the Treatment of Employee Pension and Wage Claims in Insolvency and Under Guarantee Schemes in OECD Countries: Comparative Law Lessons for Detroit and the United States","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","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; Pension; Bankruptcy; Creditor; Context (archaeology); Wage; Business; Debt; Government (linguistics); Debtor; Accounting; Economics; Finance; Labour economics","score_opus":0.05945118811615021,"score_gpt":0.30903168380747686,"score_spread":0.24958049569132665,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1535565003","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9923056,0.00019293724,0.00017015854,0.0065188524,0.000008489078,0.0006039539,0.00014117513,0.000008066755,0.000050781262],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99899226,0.00024568933,0.00008822474,0.00022212253,0.000008363381,0.00013340167,0.00027260053,0.000004466062,0.000032888398],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9993435,0.000021468084,0.00026401042,0.00017162382,0.000093425195,0.00010592958],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991672,0.00015864833,0.0002412459,0.00020308605,0.00022284515,0.0000069797943],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00014175447,0.00009875768,0.00025235713,0.00021508244,0.00014310106,0.000119969925,0.00011043789,0.000034653436,0.000011784419],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00001490464,0.00005961846,0.000038390743,0.0007780447,0.00031143427,0.0006087867,0.000035915076,0.000040670417,4.8912676e-7],"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":[0.00007476374,0.00037356326,0.4313889,0.000047332345,0.0001808477,7.585987e-8,0.0032325329,0.0012581212,0.0001751068,0.5625765,0.0002509476,0.00044132394],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013836324,0.000025104877,0.92764014,0.000020922427,0.0001727764,1.2533545e-7,0.0022405465,0.0518255,0.00006496027,0.011536622,0.005005093,0.000084598694],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0119467955,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02707965,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5510399,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000021266958,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000014524566,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9946327},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1545203131","doi":"","title":"Judges and Their Editors","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Legal Education and Practice Innovations","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":"Notice; Craft; Law; Pride; Political science; Judicial opinion; Economic Justice; Sociology; Art; Visual arts","score_opus":0.05403533965330897,"score_gpt":0.39658424178053403,"score_spread":0.34254890212722505,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1545203131","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.05917193,0.0000066969833,0.0001751209,0.5911052,0.0018305889,0.00015677024,0.000054048454,0.00019500751,0.3473046],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97285485,0.000009909814,0.0021509947,0.0012738288,0.003132324,0.0000903594,0.00017917293,0.0000069629486,0.020301573],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99950296,0.000037351463,0.000100012774,0.00012129703,0.000108715874,0.00012968932],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991085,0.00017365295,0.00005967389,0.00016921344,0.00037033347,0.00011861806],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00040796344,0.000048485384,0.000041853622,0.00008837116,0.000888372,0.00042828041,0.00016335103,0.0000744262,0.0012950451],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0021630775,0.000041331412,0.000016979158,0.0005812189,0.00020774687,0.0009975801,0.00001957699,0.00029647138,0.00009564611],"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":[2.1089905e-7,0.000043394666,0.0057573155,5.546628e-7,0.000004596002,6.919132e-9,0.008821904,5.8203035e-8,0.0002504191,0.5665837,0.4148885,0.0036493659],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000035472392,0.0000019842223,0.026946852,3.7220883e-7,0.0000024086532,5.8934694e-7,0.0049664327,0.000006555114,0.000032758606,0.0022117964,0.96573997,0.00005479858],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00097334315,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0026764711,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.91368294,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000016056656,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004438828,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99961793},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1580136977","doi":"","title":"Privatizing Workplace Privacy","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Business Law and Ethics","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":"Supreme court; Expectation of privacy; Pager; Officer; Public sector; Private sector; Concurring opinion; Probable cause; Doctrine; Political science; Law; Economic Justice; Information privacy; Business; Certiorari; Engineering; Original jurisdiction","score_opus":0.08838665354627506,"score_gpt":0.30108460601069587,"score_spread":0.2126979524644208,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1580136977","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.22719035,0.00027665673,0.024457056,0.16013014,0.0017954716,0.0009065495,0.000029986559,0.0022658925,0.5829479],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9847997,0.0000028719887,0.0030092027,0.0038953305,0.0023008974,0.00009140008,0.0005307715,0.000031236556,0.005338635],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989751,0.000005397493,0.00020530321,0.00017353128,0.00023343081,0.00040721963],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990745,0.000037328966,0.00014700276,0.00038675827,0.00032597684,0.000028432882],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00037360573,0.00013375092,0.00010942726,0.00017288786,0.0004077737,0.00049604865,0.00035300787,0.000097943295,0.00049368996],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005113803,0.00012207392,0.000055155502,0.0010809067,0.00005185666,0.0039782077,0.00022599072,0.0001920536,0.0015417414],"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":[0.0000021412648,0.00014287948,0.11615104,0.00004714241,0.000015084059,8.976718e-8,0.00014297602,0.000011723658,0.00009162273,0.7454915,0.1356718,0.0022320221],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000122104,4.3634574e-7,0.14821815,0.000010244624,0.000018963614,0.0000012849364,0.000062199404,0.00028824588,0.000011541206,0.0010723213,0.8500431,0.00015136752],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00010693103,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000012714639,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7576093,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000030299827,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000027321594,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992357},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1784713775","doi":"","title":"Judges Talking To Jurors in Criminal Cases: Why U.S. Judges Do It So Differently From Just About Everyone Else","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Law; Political science; Social psychology; Criminology","score_opus":0.10335445317305295,"score_gpt":0.39372760312334826,"score_spread":0.2903731499502953,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1784713775","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92169124,0.0002469918,0.0009731471,0.059172805,0.00029522643,0.0008836059,0.00046317212,0.00032300726,0.015950805],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9846156,0.000052229767,0.0031087305,0.0033843056,0.00026218433,0.000546013,0.00034676932,0.000033200093,0.007650959],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9970623,0.00018794881,0.0005552779,0.0006913425,0.00084842084,0.0006546946],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99736625,0.00067550445,0.0001976518,0.0005963913,0.0007482072,0.00041598798],"candidate_categories":["scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00040637996,0.0002550125,0.00030584392,0.00049430964,0.0009589012,0.0017695661,0.001150408,0.00019287874,0.0051733647],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004064279,0.00024274262,0.000099009885,0.0016684098,0.0002703258,0.0014727203,0.00024545094,0.00028196268,0.0020736519],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000012635642,0.00049763394,0.052411664,0.000023511097,0.000042451724,0.000006368744,0.048631854,0.000070697686,0.00021148045,0.012070054,0.8362455,0.04977618],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021638448,0.000017733884,0.4112166,0.00004894166,0.000031871645,0.0000017045561,0.016916772,0.000025232664,0.000040218198,0.0017857325,0.56936896,0.00032988284],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007567793,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0187824,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3588049,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000297579,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00041512202,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992667},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2246233972","doi":"","title":"Resolving Mass Legal Disputes Through Class Arbitration: The United States and Canada Compared","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Dispute Resolution and Class Actions","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":"Arbitration; Supreme court; Compulsory arbitration; Political science; Dispute resolution; Law; Class (philosophy); Federal Arbitration Act; Arbitration clause; Law and economics; Civil procedure; Economics; Computer science","score_opus":0.054179599218939806,"score_gpt":0.2501517217395624,"score_spread":0.1959721225206226,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2246233972","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.13192983,0.00012855712,0.016250135,0.15677598,0.00074717635,0.0009607982,0.0003258467,0.00076131005,0.6921204],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9833334,0.000033901237,0.0010002115,0.009344131,0.000339806,0.00015090537,0.0026827604,0.000024208006,0.0030906408],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99905276,0.000014758797,0.00023735847,0.00022043986,0.00022996005,0.0002447107],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99914205,0.00004696741,0.00015269243,0.00029278547,0.000339324,0.000026167943],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00010994522,0.0001374262,0.00010588956,0.00010141067,0.00083625293,0.00061416737,0.00028335722,0.000038670947,0.00030127325],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009019187,0.0001035146,0.00003577704,0.0007393114,0.000116904856,0.0013903562,0.00008331002,0.00015376929,0.000030587944],"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":[0.0000043130494,0.000053382217,0.0060793916,0.000013932964,0.000039913444,6.4850866e-7,0.00014260385,0.000081721446,0.000023315304,0.70923436,0.28423452,0.00009189326],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00016283095,0.000001969313,0.048933037,0.000007118842,0.000035240657,0.0000021012904,0.0020026248,0.017064746,0.000010279372,0.0011235499,0.93052036,0.00013616517],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5925337,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5643008,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8514036,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005851092,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00011921261,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.64318657},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W251065692","doi":"","title":"Beyond Hospital Misbehavior: An Alternative Account of Medical Related Financial Distress","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Healthcare Policy and Management","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":9,"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":"York University","keywords":"Debtor; Bankruptcy; Creditor; Wrongdoing; Obligation; Health care; Debt; Business; Suspect; Incentive; Actuarial science; Finance; Law; Political science; Economics","score_opus":0.05364013270014764,"score_gpt":0.3286993493604173,"score_spread":0.27505921666026967,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W251065692","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.717794,0.00032470297,0.003704697,0.2229118,0.00059758243,0.0007209262,0.006257796,0.00016875513,0.04751973],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9958897,0.000080808124,0.000733599,0.00055109104,0.00019304249,0.000111201036,0.0009049209,0.0000132808245,0.0015223318],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986239,0.000015609154,0.00065744587,0.0003240377,0.00012902512,0.0002499916],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989706,0.000018317753,0.000312364,0.0003887429,0.00009911985,0.00021081262],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00045517634,0.00010922888,0.0002195777,0.00019563675,0.000113026435,0.00005686461,0.00052367366,0.00015416049,0.00094640534],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003462121,0.00012271723,0.00007839785,0.0003224035,0.000086629756,0.0005156499,0.00009382759,0.00018411431,0.00024110904],"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":[0.0000013895839,0.0004735045,0.005450561,0.000009071199,0.000018052364,4.613406e-7,0.0012316484,0.000022808605,6.888199e-7,0.97131073,0.011137846,0.0103432145],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00059628504,0.00008394917,0.16018924,0.000010633503,0.0000081187145,0.000001684621,0.00012381314,0.0029276647,0.000030965082,0.014896907,0.8208861,0.00024464205],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002633832,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00065160246,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.95641387,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012234213,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007651159,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99996686},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2542214041","doi":"","title":"Keeping the Promise of Public Fiduciary Theory: A Reply to Leib and Galoob","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Legal principles and applications","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":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Fiduciary; Law; Political science; Law and economics; Private law; Sociology; Public law; Duty","score_opus":0.09025192314591357,"score_gpt":0.356500903930992,"score_spread":0.2662489807850784,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2542214041","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.099393584,0.00007146095,0.010742574,0.78309125,0.000053193788,0.0011732938,0.00026978904,0.00019335923,0.10501152],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9848578,0.000027884664,0.0009415715,0.0013396752,0.00011541879,0.00040035954,0.000014850188,0.000008692802,0.012293722],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989315,0.00016149798,0.00020362943,0.00023560842,0.00022442336,0.00024330229],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986327,0.00030480098,0.00010776566,0.00045345316,0.00031972377,0.00018155432],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013748913,0.0000689957,0.00008994768,0.00007188882,0.00080292806,0.00015648014,0.0004747252,0.000041561165,0.0001602195],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0019051331,0.000040295196,0.000044981945,0.00063719874,0.00033187598,0.00038168623,0.00012811927,0.000060549002,0.000051250463],"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":[0.0000013009692,0.000038900398,0.0024200939,0.0000019316703,0.000011651659,1.8900627e-8,0.0033572924,2.202483e-7,0.00050937856,0.9667106,0.011350902,0.0155977085],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010035006,0.000008501834,0.03906533,0.000009828985,0.000009019231,5.130389e-7,0.0012721746,0.0000041189287,0.00007921278,0.012592634,0.94678277,0.00007554513],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005389376,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0006256016,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.95411795,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000051215717,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002535794,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.61755544},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2554110004","doi":"","title":"Introduction: Twenty-Five Years of the Gulf of Maine Judgment","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"International Maritime Law Issues","field":"Environmental Science","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":"Maritime boundary; International court; Boundary (topology); Settlement (finance); Continental shelf; Geography; Treaty; Oceanography; Political science; Square (algebra); United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; International law; Law; Fishery; Public international law; Geology; Business","score_opus":0.010476754427811142,"score_gpt":0.25173321224738604,"score_spread":0.2412564578195749,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2554110004","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.92068696,0.0000027736485,0.00016622573,0.03512476,0.00042096025,0.00025642855,0.00016822379,0.000026159827,0.043147497],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97444046,0.0000010902205,0.00380478,0.00008156785,0.00013762132,0.000024238378,0.00007181152,0.0000055187515,0.021432916],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99927336,0.000016401715,0.00017955338,0.00014118064,0.00030411736,0.00008539313],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99938387,0.000023192017,0.00012276831,0.00038021468,0.000060398605,0.000029576724],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00013854817,0.00004779814,0.00006296202,0.000023015373,0.00005312922,0.0000125908355,0.00040978414,0.000033334047,0.0071524107],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00019257916,0.000038767757,0.0000493258,0.0002682448,0.000253372,0.00015302523,0.00019323031,0.000105255465,0.00017392606],"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":[0.000008989062,0.0006470017,0.067455724,0.000009409917,0.00006309316,1.4023735e-7,0.0014425485,0.0011585635,0.14478034,0.36397165,0.4146161,0.005846441],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008877184,0.000009785062,0.4785772,0.0000018025477,0.000007880854,0.0000027602587,0.00004918697,0.00011120022,0.010310785,0.0012396474,0.50955534,0.000045633893],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00036444084,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00022332718,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.41112146,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000039707076,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000119828765,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99375516},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2767332693","doi":"","title":"California's Climate Diplomacy and Dormant Preemption","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"International Law and Aviation","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":"Commerce Clause; Supreme court; Diplomacy; Political science; State (computer science); Law; Government (linguistics); Dormant Commerce Clause; China; Power (physics); Governor; Foreign policy; Treaty; Federalism; Politics; Engineering","score_opus":0.05349167589899685,"score_gpt":0.3903065535542201,"score_spread":0.3368148776552233,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2767332693","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.36705005,0.000020920967,0.0011479635,0.060232136,0.00023427611,0.0004155107,0.0007109687,0.00022830108,0.5699599],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9933044,0.00007243295,0.00044397748,0.00009334652,0.00019485384,0.000043994827,0.0002555137,0.000003973513,0.0055875108],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9994019,0.000025590061,0.00010102803,0.0001241093,0.00020001423,0.00014730281],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.999406,0.000020323936,0.00012525794,0.0001796793,0.00019427192,0.00007447111],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002957322,0.000045329634,0.000045019013,0.000037322796,0.0023193564,0.0005960078,0.00023178342,0.00004377964,0.00012419859],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00031874876,0.000042292228,0.00002353499,0.00003555501,0.00014352638,0.000772217,0.000057752633,0.000049261453,0.00014939767],"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":[0.0000014605283,0.000023893812,0.05446821,0.0000021520873,0.000005452757,8.25893e-8,0.0006333926,8.096011e-7,0.000042802614,0.9398971,0.0026166784,0.002307956],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010085151,0.0000039635106,0.47233254,0.000005059882,0.000006026756,4.708227e-7,0.00011433369,0.00018449423,0.000023048367,0.004342407,0.52282697,0.000059851183],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0013388122,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002012363,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9355547,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004546994,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000048190264,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989795},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2980143916","doi":"","title":"Book Review: Women Under the Law: The False Promise of Human Rights","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Historical and Contemporary Political Dynamics","field":"Arts and Humanities","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; Human rights; Law and economics; Sociology","score_opus":0.05406308912076459,"score_gpt":0.2805880973273655,"score_spread":0.22652500820660093,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2980143916","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.003358345,0.011324193,0.000055839962,0.15152965,0.00012867198,0.00087810756,0.00032747842,0.00014981613,0.8322479],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1681283,0.00021809225,0.0000064957244,0.036174674,0.00035407944,0.00064710726,0.00029562824,0.000016209908,0.7941594],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9991112,0.00006563026,0.000294873,0.00013371155,0.00018529037,0.00020934582],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99909455,0.000067466804,0.00009696061,0.00044722582,0.00020975634,0.00008406321],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00016248589,0.00009846588,0.00014278044,0.000021431275,0.001101937,0.00009293672,0.00042190292,0.000024783287,0.004563469],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000017626431,0.00004623727,0.00008922609,0.00008109205,0.0005121934,0.00024165197,0.000043449323,0.0001336909,0.00012679546],"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":[6.281008e-7,0.000058533275,0.000002186888,0.000011691332,0.000013086831,7.2155196e-8,0.0013542359,1.9087703e-7,0.0000013518865,0.62479043,0.3737435,0.000024082594],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007580124,0.000024427121,0.00008517272,0.000022074277,0.000019307576,9.840692e-7,0.0002924225,0.000018327351,0.0000011200134,0.01977694,0.9796106,0.000072775816],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00059752626,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00069826184,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.60586715,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006168504,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000026900356,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9963465},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3212354004","doi":"","title":"More Sorry Than Safe: Assessing the Precautionary Principle and the Proposed International Biosafety Protocol","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Genetically Modified Organisms Research","field":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","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":"Biosafety; Precautionary principle; Convention on Biological Diversity; Harm; Negotiation; Protocol (science); International regime; Political science; Convention; Conference of the parties; Montreal Protocol; Law and economics; Business; International trade; Biotechnology; Law; Economics; Biodiversity; Biology; Geography; Medicine","score_opus":0.043213879979909886,"score_gpt":0.3523322020966485,"score_spread":0.3091183221167386,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3212354004","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.39503193,0.0000132647965,0.00007173159,0.5412757,0.000043363,0.037081953,0.00024768626,0.00017981394,0.026054554],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9616852,0.000009862058,0.0008951429,0.00053616654,0.0002463,0.02433609,0.00045773445,0.000002428965,0.011831077],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99869573,0.00016868745,0.00021312291,0.00027691177,0.00041874466,0.00022679252],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99930745,0.00021034613,0.00005801829,0.00014426385,0.00019693359,0.00008298624],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00050740736,0.000106322084,0.00008012075,0.000011637389,0.0008820433,0.0005018677,0.00069170736,0.00006862262,0.002434618],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00018214902,0.000029009838,0.000055876557,0.00039318672,0.00046375458,0.00024153668,0.00018045247,0.00020475611,0.00006912959],"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":[0.00034192018,0.0014200076,0.039433237,0.000032048705,0.00024532527,0.00000201446,0.00251078,0.000201621,0.06678823,0.16160055,0.024633886,0.7027904],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00027844825,0.000017870696,0.692167,0.0000039268825,0.0000042550796,0.000010084394,0.00018269566,0.0014542763,0.00027930067,0.00064645667,0.30488527,0.000070464805],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000088125875,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000059843387,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7027199,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000317548,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000048473798,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9984773},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7060875377","doi":"","title":"An Overview of Canadian Privacy Law for Pharmaceutical and Device Manufacturers Operating in Canada","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Faculty publications","topic":"Soil Moisture and Remote Sensing","field":"Environmental Science","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":"Personally identifiable information; Privacy law; Privacy policy; Parliament; Legislation; Information privacy; Information privacy law; Government (linguistics); Data Protection Act 1998; Enforcement","score_opus":0.12729459023325193,"score_gpt":0.333884708193535,"score_spread":0.20659011796028307,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7060875377","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9356316,0.00021911967,0.00003587908,0.017468335,0.000055896086,0.00050272915,0.00009755949,0.00001671043,0.045972224],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9951537,0.000018559975,0.0029755493,0.0016920149,0.000010803847,0.000004567616,0.000052792864,0.0000057044276,0.000086297],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99939656,0.000018914847,0.00013605447,0.00016450215,0.00009620106,0.00018775814],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99959564,0.000028712186,0.000027478907,0.00013936403,0.000012875285,0.00019589822],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00006856756,0.0000645341,0.000079181176,0.00004772946,0.00012625473,0.00002794941,0.00011888805,0.000029782543,0.00013700682],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003164898,0.00005783705,0.000012214255,0.00027707306,0.000048939215,0.00017920155,0.000021143065,0.000066215296,0.0000031102188],"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":[0.000004331787,0.00030140724,0.57478446,0.0001504244,0.00007108271,0.000008642867,0.008098741,0.005736969,0.0097434325,0.014169653,0.08921112,0.29771975],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002451093,0.000009857473,0.5427103,0.000010028827,0.000011029738,0.0000069355647,0.00026214236,0.018113391,0.0011494849,0.000044532288,0.4373024,0.00013476558],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9923182,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99955684,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3480913,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00027667894,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006942211,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.23585264},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}