{"meta":{"query_hash":"00046fd87a5c","filters":{"venue":"Fordham law review"},"cohort_total":10,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":10,"exported":10,"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/00046fd87a5c","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Fordham+law+review"},"results":[{"id":"W146107859","doi":"","title":"A Tale of Two Countries: Canada's Response to the Peer-to-Peer Crisis and What it Means for the United States","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Canadian Policy and Governance","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Peer review; Political science; Peer-to-peer; Law; Computer science","score_opus":0.023530454527768477,"score_gpt":0.33227623796141026,"score_spread":0.3087457834336418,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W146107859","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":[0.028174058,0.009696188,0.00082977896,0.8450697,0.0026527732,0.000038702576,0.00020523806,0.000046057416,0.11328752],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6893119,0.009602135,0.0014762344,0.2213806,0.0008192036,0.000076776785,0.00014084775,0.00015055409,0.07704176],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99145913,0.0014289751,0.0001237958,0.00048731512,0.002265004,0.004235828],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9905087,0.0015201868,0.00029724734,0.00023433655,0.0035558739,0.0038836547],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00467788,0.00054299796,0.0005937557,0.0018826034,0.04308034,0.027394524,0.0027894143,0.015315003,0.009618241],"category_scores_gemma":[0.016484743,0.00040104668,0.0005868454,0.0038143308,0.022105392,0.008713806,0.006603774,0.016850766,0.0005805068],"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":[0.00008118409,0.000061273364,0.0047340193,0.00012446321,0.000045659734,0.0007267384,0.021654513,0.0006451917,0.00025450543,0.541983,0.39744642,0.03224308],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000079768615,0.00004025054,0.011865093,0.0007192642,0.00008894666,0.00015388036,0.11120375,0.0007138404,0.00043708782,0.07497749,0.799473,0.0002476284],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.98670304,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9925006,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.08917567,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.08917567,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.25812176,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.64701784},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1493863039","doi":"","title":"Loving Gender Balance: Reframing Identity-Based Inequality Remedies","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Corporate Law and Human Rights","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":8,"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":"Jurisprudence; Sociology; Supreme court; Identity (music); Inequality; Gender studies; Scholarship; Nationality; Political science; Law; Immigration; Aesthetics","score_opus":0.08220999882219028,"score_gpt":0.28273004879346886,"score_spread":0.2005200499712786,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1493863039","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":[0.03635062,0.0056896117,0.032852106,0.11765306,0.002632575,0.00014847738,0.00007046695,0.00021176398,0.80439126],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.87282515,0.0018663475,0.0109079,0.045361407,0.0011428738,0.00027224494,0.000045933797,0.00017326046,0.067404896],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9940626,0.00193183,0.00016567572,0.000787019,0.0015523533,0.001500505],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974597,0.0014473276,0.0002052101,0.00025290163,0.00033054495,0.0003043111],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006157717,0.00051877374,0.0003465262,0.0013293264,0.008332172,0.007859041,0.0025210835,0.007507533,0.010973914],"category_scores_gemma":[0.010754251,0.00029568747,0.0006348971,0.00058068254,0.01951392,0.007908234,0.008277091,0.008491825,0.0010868784],"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":[0.00001184088,0.000027941998,0.00031130007,0.000026041404,0.000003963944,0.00023086669,0.0061343885,0.00019059613,0.0003653967,0.9665191,0.009701705,0.016476735],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004161568,0.00011130117,0.0015924094,0.0006263982,0.000032745244,0.00043390057,0.019140325,0.001078355,0.00157034,0.5687507,0.40657553,0.000046329842],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010300825,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.022397783,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010973914,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0046515055,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005873079,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.036711335},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1512866983","doi":"","title":"Foreign Official Immunity and the 'Baseline' Problem","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction","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":"Jurisdiction; Statutory law; Doctrine; Law; Personal jurisdiction; Political science; Universal jurisdiction; State (computer science); Common law; State immunity; Customary international law; Qualified immunity; International law; Sovereign immunity; Public international law; Constitution","score_opus":0.05194192873920622,"score_gpt":0.304862104085157,"score_spread":0.2529201753459508,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1512866983","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":[0.079363674,0.0035785115,0.02482327,0.0728157,0.001397259,0.00010165871,0.00041168617,0.00017420581,0.817334],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9553836,0.00084558653,0.0031784037,0.008589763,0.00045877692,0.00012442049,0.0002334206,0.00005407041,0.031131988],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9895285,0.004045824,0.00049194257,0.0020720249,0.0019388542,0.00192299],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99166334,0.0036129376,0.0007374902,0.0016147265,0.0017969043,0.0005745574],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009975283,0.0002875907,0.0009217686,0.0017197503,0.005888958,0.0053674257,0.0020815886,0.0045664497,0.02050413],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03411491,0.00029189832,0.0005964149,0.001669499,0.007353525,0.008203387,0.0051739984,0.0073702303,0.0015525062],"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":[0.000017740618,0.000020785596,0.0008338406,0.000034398334,0.0000048483407,0.00012936564,0.0008215757,0.00010473391,0.000025447453,0.9817585,0.006071459,0.0101772975],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007036372,0.000094240335,0.0043429197,0.00035404137,0.000026176684,0.0010309925,0.0051942565,0.001048132,0.00027076778,0.80309105,0.18445167,0.00002544944],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0134235555,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009520525,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02050413,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0050842417,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0047990372,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.068593085},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1604575688","doi":"","title":"THE PARADOXES OF PRO BONO","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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; Economic Justice; Political science; American exceptionalism; Supreme court; Representation (politics); Legal education; Exceptionalism; Immigration; Sociology; Politics","score_opus":0.025426273112143242,"score_gpt":0.3487777984498652,"score_spread":0.32335152533772193,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1604575688","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":[0.014854116,0.015350588,0.0055281445,0.6143195,0.0029534218,0.000043373937,0.00027126234,0.00013645424,0.34654322],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.71958965,0.011394756,0.0030381044,0.22108798,0.010711168,0.0002335498,0.0001338202,0.00041416194,0.033396777],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9892608,0.00419621,0.00027529983,0.0019485505,0.002827937,0.001491226],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9724692,0.017122934,0.002213176,0.0018284546,0.0030815194,0.0032846993],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01657467,0.00067072565,0.0011248983,0.0023226985,0.0072379634,0.012207258,0.0021945168,0.013541605,0.022589218],"category_scores_gemma":[0.053443674,0.0006131276,0.0007897019,0.0023807473,0.024740774,0.014920122,0.0049266345,0.01923477,0.004017455],"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":[0.000039291623,0.000023654662,0.00033167994,0.000031563846,0.000009066069,0.0000705676,0.00041265128,0.00025242782,0.000025142439,0.94990176,0.04020386,0.008698289],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000042619296,0.000012422999,0.00061556895,0.00015267244,0.0000054559355,0.000091396265,0.00037994952,0.0005289721,0.000048552643,0.8855931,0.112504706,0.000024509472],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0064194803,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006547405,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.022589218,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.010312012,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0059979437,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08765626},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1867839040","doi":"","title":"The Preservation Obligation: Regulating and Sanctioning Pre-Litigation Spoliation in Federal Court","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Duty; Sanctions; Law; Obligation; Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; Political science; Summary judgment; Pension; Misconduct; Civil procedure; Supreme court","score_opus":0.0541456604935297,"score_gpt":0.32113545725217446,"score_spread":0.26698979675864476,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1867839040","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":[0.34336802,0.005162111,0.083165176,0.089091726,0.0006825147,0.0005546879,0.0001764526,0.00074998144,0.47704932],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9791326,0.0004525738,0.0052947756,0.0067874966,0.00036551285,0.00011539981,0.000035429744,0.000043518736,0.0077727097],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.96050864,0.010930015,0.0029011164,0.0045404173,0.01162595,0.009493861],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95464677,0.02603339,0.004878351,0.0065406053,0.006062938,0.0018378678],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.029500576,0.0003645979,0.0006212519,0.0030088883,0.01439929,0.01920536,0.0042840242,0.015842112,0.0023317037],"category_scores_gemma":[0.052054904,0.0010317803,0.00082398107,0.0022855557,0.01859277,0.011378475,0.007330422,0.009008199,0.0006191066],"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":[0.00004185564,0.00008654843,0.005341801,0.000047649264,0.000024070676,0.0006476549,0.0066791107,0.0010858225,0.001257167,0.94531363,0.010466242,0.029008573],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001529024,0.0005387631,0.03474587,0.0014832133,0.0003595989,0.0015013282,0.011645166,0.01428362,0.013293034,0.722559,0.19888514,0.00055236364],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.047109943,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.067861274,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.047109943,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.014616706,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0258315,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.15601581},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2341768213","doi":"","title":"Registered Savings Plans and the Making of Middle Class Canada: Toward a Performative Theory of Tax Policy","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Canadian Policy and Governance","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Middle class; Performative utterance; Incentive; Salience (neuroscience); Tax reform; Tax policy; Politics; Tax avoidance; Economics; Public economics; Political science; Political economy; Market economy; Law; Psychology","score_opus":0.053264056908642374,"score_gpt":0.2976925660136262,"score_spread":0.24442850910498382,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2341768213","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":[0.058228128,0.06148081,0.0046958057,0.23922469,0.00089674466,0.00012148683,0.00031663288,0.00007536716,0.6349604],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9196552,0.02628218,0.0017740802,0.013436104,0.00025101757,0.000040618022,0.00009978554,0.000052306696,0.03840869],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9925206,0.0017065763,0.00012060135,0.0004153741,0.0028543316,0.0023826896],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99550927,0.0010578692,0.00032194937,0.00022137492,0.0021763076,0.0007132215],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0064234966,0.00030469723,0.00034939198,0.003739811,0.016772974,0.013283952,0.0021015443,0.002907187,0.0042132186],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008528426,0.00033017193,0.00034353227,0.004519919,0.02064648,0.0032916039,0.0022266144,0.0041874642,0.0002936199],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000006367158,0.000011149503,0.0010870576,0.00006584493,0.00000852932,0.000046372075,0.005013716,0.00037349883,0.000046993748,0.9589872,0.017934322,0.016418912],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000024831697,0.000017586663,0.015010898,0.0009769185,0.000047647245,0.00005266083,0.01937166,0.0009982769,0.0003813998,0.1571567,0.805888,0.00007337986],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.98285496,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9864352,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15791063,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.15791063,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.24873802,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9767043},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121630146","doi":"","title":"Outsourcing Immigration Compliance","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Employment and Welfare Studies","field":"Health Professions","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":"Immigration; Immigration law; Deportation; Government (linguistics); Outsourcing; Nationality; Political science; Population; Compliance (psychology); Immigration policy; Business; Law; Sociology","score_opus":0.13549682635262542,"score_gpt":0.4655588366139104,"score_spread":0.330062010261285,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3121630146","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.4059892,0.0004503216,0.0109242555,0.02649209,0.00044612208,0.0009668994,0.00036070365,0.0005853484,0.55378497],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9357017,0.00050860964,0.005603041,0.003116093,0.00012817534,0.00033295937,0.0002869832,0.00006461406,0.054257803],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9877358,0.0036357162,0.00070584327,0.00086354185,0.0022769421,0.004782036],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9856666,0.0026903788,0.0020787911,0.0028955403,0.0027630848,0.003905648],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007607647,0.00041213774,0.00024104494,0.0011648047,0.008071156,0.0049994155,0.0017673352,0.0015669955,0.04141602],"category_scores_gemma":[0.019228548,0.00037555437,0.00051940064,0.0018865517,0.002435772,0.0022166194,0.011771313,0.002599538,0.0049767676],"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":[0.00014938826,0.0021427409,0.14929286,0.00047858822,0.00004768365,0.0020258818,0.033461574,0.002990619,0.0020584746,0.1760213,0.082623065,0.54870784],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021117266,0.0012141207,0.23711863,0.001476075,0.00009519496,0.002414009,0.116655886,0.009425125,0.0074816826,0.037356943,0.5864256,0.00012557469],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.024056973,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03362873,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04141602,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006678924,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.042057537,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1385504},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3122171275","doi":"","title":"“Natural Born” Disputes in the 2016 Presidential Election","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Dismissal; Presidential system; Political science; Jurisdiction; Supreme court; Law; Constitution; Presidential election; Judicial review; Politics","score_opus":0.015105933032825125,"score_gpt":0.3169053765679362,"score_spread":0.30179944353511107,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3122171275","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":[0.22582926,0.01268437,0.0055135675,0.19303972,0.0063747563,0.00021897076,0.00028948596,0.00010000332,0.5559499],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.88158023,0.00226194,0.0017009294,0.047857005,0.0021563952,0.00015637313,0.0000897128,0.00006627845,0.06413109],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.97599256,0.0109157525,0.0014925948,0.0026338554,0.0037737126,0.005191496],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98377925,0.011014211,0.0011116831,0.00073724595,0.0020508086,0.0013068507],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03100173,0.0003103311,0.0008082653,0.0009000744,0.02751925,0.014310108,0.0018807864,0.01478006,0.0044021164],"category_scores_gemma":[0.036573112,0.0007826978,0.0007833384,0.0010773742,0.009983908,0.006256624,0.005826649,0.016281424,0.0009223441],"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":[0.000050000297,0.000063889296,0.002120403,0.000075038726,0.00001506733,0.0015405738,0.022887265,0.00018886155,0.0004248295,0.9134718,0.049464483,0.009697776],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00010378261,0.00012746039,0.0096304,0.00041224548,0.000056779896,0.0007137188,0.025270408,0.0007527041,0.0016324267,0.08820695,0.8729028,0.0001903252],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.058034614,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.13593605,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.058034614,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011854723,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0113858525,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1639548},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3122367334","doi":"","title":"The New Constitution and the Judicialization of Pure Politics Worldwide","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":95,"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":"Political science; Politics; Law; Constitutionalism; Human rights; Constitution; Democracy","score_opus":0.017601125761629022,"score_gpt":0.292893257251816,"score_spread":0.27529213149018694,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3122367334","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":[0.018457172,0.022424022,0.013652391,0.08234651,0.004123433,0.00006591559,0.000119175056,0.0001488017,0.8586626],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.72600424,0.012255136,0.008172647,0.031123077,0.008721947,0.00029649583,0.0002555064,0.00023943276,0.21293154],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98965245,0.0037979928,0.0006687327,0.001959934,0.0026638543,0.0012570814],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9937179,0.003010446,0.00049703,0.0014825143,0.0008949125,0.00039704458],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010339627,0.00030263505,0.0005840331,0.0017295139,0.004778366,0.01552109,0.0013945126,0.005187904,0.009167557],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012542641,0.00041947933,0.0005035167,0.0013323849,0.022083519,0.0112909805,0.005839294,0.010449769,0.0012208301],"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":[0.0000024819847,0.000003491222,0.000023569624,0.000008089976,0.0000012992627,0.000017305687,0.00028836896,0.000045408426,0.000055886834,0.9930011,0.003512613,0.00304048],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000027005737,0.000018121424,0.0003985356,0.00015339661,0.0000074257487,0.00006836183,0.0003682539,0.0002950638,0.00024294468,0.5167427,0.48165736,0.000020816735],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004156463,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0048462627,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01552109,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007374547,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0062442557,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.054681838},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3125849290","doi":"","title":"Defining “Accidents” in the Air: Why Tort Law Principles Are Essential to Interpret the Montreal Convention’s “Accident” Requirement","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Fordham law review","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":"Tort; Law; Accident (philosophy); Convention; Political science; Liability; Philosophy","score_opus":0.028175342325582862,"score_gpt":0.33468242059449,"score_spread":0.3065070782689071,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3125849290","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":[0.031147216,0.034110703,0.06911826,0.41299024,0.0031695468,0.00011964967,0.0002706007,0.00015810854,0.44891578],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.86533004,0.012473502,0.014949762,0.06349442,0.0024928548,0.0001858609,0.00013581559,0.00014874674,0.04078894],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9906376,0.0036407667,0.00042201116,0.0009664069,0.0030219897,0.0013112047],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9923044,0.0041264626,0.00061837735,0.00044760195,0.0022295981,0.00027349894],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.011243166,0.0005874066,0.0004603557,0.0015471367,0.0076618926,0.009769912,0.0028484396,0.007294997,0.002898437],"category_scores_gemma":[0.014758771,0.0005943213,0.0005621773,0.001147101,0.03592191,0.010272466,0.003486082,0.01291773,0.00048425532],"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":[0.0000010807524,0.000001998441,0.000087464,0.000009604975,0.000001157006,0.000016125869,0.0009823345,0.00011547947,0.000028438415,0.9929061,0.004629775,0.0012205191],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001964594,0.000019120125,0.002135003,0.00031972068,0.000015473071,0.000087058565,0.00309801,0.00093101314,0.00037718046,0.6618787,0.33105266,0.00006642486],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4044602,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.35624227,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4044602,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.019419657,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.028394619,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.804212},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}