{"meta":{"query_hash":"755576d66a22","filters":{"venue":"Journal for Juridical Science"},"cohort_total":14,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":14,"exported":14,"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/755576d66a22","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Journal+for+Juridical+Science"},"results":[{"id":"W146917027","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v29i3.2898","title":"Exploring fairness in health care reform","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Human Rights and Development","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Scrutiny; Deference; Accountability; Affirmative action; Health care; Health equity; Political science; Economic Justice; Public economics; Health policy; Law; Economics","score_opus":0.13537996061567764,"score_gpt":0.3948435848409313,"score_spread":0.25946362422525365,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W146917027","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":[0.9556664,0.00026245118,0.002148593,0.02174925,0.0023999086,0.00041069658,0.0000019476372,0.00004906047,0.017311685],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9962486,0.00022634509,0.002695224,0.00032760188,0.00031686403,0.0000152362445,2.4131876e-7,0.0000043002365,0.00016557006],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9979044,0.000029201234,0.00032356379,0.00019783906,0.00088188634,0.00066311],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991607,0.000023809947,0.00009894859,0.00007375206,0.00013617756,0.0005066223],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0029401747,0.000069275935,0.00013158616,0.00018096139,0.002527008,0.00024446516,0.00047731196,0.000027628954,0.000032354903],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00018041523,0.000047451016,0.00005233419,0.0005984138,0.0004887878,0.000961383,0.000042383817,0.00020275736,0.000012704792],"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":[0.000024871979,0.00009658312,0.0003054474,0.000030884166,0.000002447254,0.000032161835,0.12172117,0.00012683246,0.000050846105,0.81703633,0.00013734202,0.060435068],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002026773,0.00046260422,0.026425833,0.00052121707,0.0000031384964,0.00003371559,0.06815109,0.000011449068,0.00090691325,0.12300512,0.77790064,0.0005515418],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0016232685,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0039865565,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.77776325,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0032992235,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0041154874,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99877155},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1595545527","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v31i1.2922","title":"An international perspective of restorative justice practices and research outcomes","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Theology; Art; Philosophy","score_opus":0.1251056966468923,"score_gpt":0.5630817214649989,"score_spread":0.4379760248181066,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1595545527","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":[0.81167006,0.0004495949,0.0008034907,0.025020199,0.0021385069,0.00043338863,0.000022518114,0.000032753618,0.15942949],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99258834,0.000049221402,0.005721288,0.000043982505,0.00079181505,0.000005140284,2.33607e-7,0.000004385086,0.00079556543],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9967793,0.0003045245,0.00025116536,0.00027210714,0.0019873218,0.00040555297],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99589765,0.0011602867,0.00037673063,0.00012424272,0.00216286,0.00027820028],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.008773292,0.00006628963,0.00013112165,0.00024935967,0.0019871867,0.00052885263,0.00093621446,0.000060386563,0.000045146866],"category_scores_gemma":[0.018305123,0.000050699855,0.000043103693,0.00074160023,0.0038746125,0.0022552586,0.00009323507,0.00038228452,0.000004160748],"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":[0.000088450775,0.00022755386,0.014879495,0.000005653911,0.0000101975675,0.000010488237,0.04860795,0.000015271571,0.0020879132,0.93237215,0.001028677,0.00066618156],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0011189329,0.0011532216,0.09221641,0.00007011073,0.000089535584,0.000027001737,0.14296323,0.00082437217,0.0020601808,0.3146866,0.4443693,0.00042112777],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0021663713,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003461348,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.61768556,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00042050247,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010550922,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9993121},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1907220870","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v32i2.2940","title":"The role of public policy in the nonenforcement of foreign judgments arising from gambling debts in South African courts: A comparative overview","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Comity; Enforcement; Debt; Political science; Law; Interpretation (philosophy); Foreign policy; Jurisdiction; Public administration; Economics; Finance","score_opus":0.1112529788754521,"score_gpt":0.4212934574958366,"score_spread":0.3100404786203845,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1907220870","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":[0.9515984,0.0030244207,0.0023500293,0.0018664371,0.00030451777,0.0008611076,0.000019947738,0.000009086164,0.039966024],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987638,0.00009537091,0.0007949361,0.00011681234,0.00020057333,0.000008559094,4.4493854e-7,0.0000044775456,0.000015031354],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9959917,0.0002809904,0.00080144074,0.00021162606,0.0018828931,0.0008313456],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973903,0.0013361425,0.00058011117,0.00020805156,0.0002466328,0.00023880572],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014842546,0.000115481664,0.0002820524,0.00029154235,0.0010297484,0.00027994905,0.001584543,0.00006349773,0.000016441289],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002442046,0.000067315406,0.000114861505,0.0021151165,0.0017741151,0.00050318084,0.00013206313,0.00036783834,0.0000016118437],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00015991033,0.00036552167,0.04318824,0.000011609112,0.000028074175,0.000008409354,0.5338992,0.0001770825,0.0009840725,0.40319347,0.00005742808,0.017926993],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0024751055,0.00061071216,0.061560575,0.0005613041,0.000052727253,0.000006151278,0.48474628,0.004028187,0.004090306,0.28221327,0.15908338,0.00057200395],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003932771,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0026526104,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.15902595,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00055865047,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012892913,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.79200965},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1933453569","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v36i2.3018","title":"Pecuniary interests and the rule against adjudicative bias: The automatic disqualification or objective reasonable approach?","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Commonwealth; Constitution; Theology; Political science; Law; Philosophy; Law and economics; Sociology","score_opus":0.09870584771046623,"score_gpt":0.3610285210144931,"score_spread":0.2623226733040269,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1933453569","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":[0.5863517,0.0031031757,0.017665919,0.031233557,0.0028631496,0.0051207813,0.00004412829,0.00032928013,0.35328835],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9941776,0.0001696267,0.003797834,0.000541546,0.00029871988,0.00009059198,4.997878e-7,0.000009582783,0.0009140339],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99715024,0.00062449544,0.00037615545,0.00031908613,0.0009902607,0.0005397517],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973546,0.001297231,0.00039908112,0.0002955335,0.00031409558,0.00033944528],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.009413562,0.00013526235,0.00020621672,0.00008121815,0.004025635,0.00046873649,0.0015348862,0.000072665374,0.00006729116],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009279433,0.000059385326,0.00010064152,0.00097287237,0.008064122,0.00076870504,0.00020178774,0.0004330552,0.000019817626],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00033495927,0.00020548137,0.00058163574,0.000017099754,0.000041797197,0.0000055632913,0.74254936,0.0000028647733,0.000047839716,0.22622797,0.0018300526,0.02815537],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0059956787,0.00091153174,0.049949575,0.0005190659,0.00042560606,0.00018768459,0.3768442,0.030889738,0.00094219024,0.2814246,0.25035697,0.0015531451],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00030018148,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00006222424,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4078259,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00022745044,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00088754087,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9990658},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1934157515","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v33i1.2951","title":"Gronde vir die weiering van toegang tot inligting soos van toepassing op openbare instellings (deel II)","year":2008,"lang":"af","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Theology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.053831095083939316,"score_gpt":0.354117746080132,"score_spread":0.3002866509961927,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1934157515","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":[0.90873367,0.0040028985,0.0073485635,0.0057808533,0.008640945,0.0012221326,0.000046026224,0.0002481449,0.06397679],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97759455,0.0004378947,0.010099132,0.00050789287,0.0045177406,0.000020103409,0.0000025123109,0.00007474051,0.006745439],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9894864,0.0002929449,0.0016907969,0.0013596262,0.004046425,0.0031238312],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9947978,0.0006577342,0.0011114199,0.000580972,0.0007847578,0.0020672833],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.006300756,0.0006702947,0.00092342834,0.0004738913,0.02185718,0.0022213224,0.0038246904,0.00045845757,0.00035465608],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0040504276,0.0006060572,0.0006123549,0.0026329393,0.0052580666,0.004416014,0.0013758964,0.001968123,0.00016131635],"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":[0.0008673221,0.003200564,0.017958231,0.0006203513,0.00035573213,0.0027465292,0.6799039,0.00926269,0.039733436,0.026413731,0.022732569,0.19620492],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0022479016,0.0011434505,0.0019912883,0.0013383203,0.00020666057,0.0004010318,0.011212752,0.015718285,0.007747646,0.010789409,0.9447154,0.0024878506],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007217455,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00013976896,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9219828,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001838289,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0031802303,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996391},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1969839827","doi":"10.4314/jjs.v28i1.27135","title":"Groepsgedingvoering - die voorstel van die Suid-Afrikaanse Regskommissie vir die sertifisering van 'n groepsgeding","year":2004,"lang":"af","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Die (integrated circuit); Theology; Philosophy; Engineering","score_opus":0.04650540702735572,"score_gpt":0.35488767523740283,"score_spread":0.3083822682100471,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1969839827","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":[0.83001846,0.012104315,0.018627819,0.02197735,0.031092945,0.0027031868,0.00013764488,0.0008684931,0.08246979],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9794314,0.00090482226,0.0060282205,0.00037157667,0.006758897,0.000045380635,0.0000031967506,0.00014442437,0.0063120876],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98579764,0.00029955362,0.002182138,0.0019293722,0.00520523,0.0045860563],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99256045,0.0008117896,0.0011719153,0.0008862793,0.0009978388,0.0035717208],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.010925447,0.0010371336,0.0012086821,0.0007509544,0.011610223,0.004086745,0.004547365,0.0006448199,0.00034162702],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007018928,0.00091965555,0.0009734043,0.002284818,0.0051797135,0.0050276266,0.0011521996,0.0025501116,0.00033496867],"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":[0.0027768563,0.0059074685,0.020743355,0.0019912387,0.001051754,0.008467478,0.54504883,0.023644673,0.153463,0.08907372,0.01008255,0.13774908],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004102279,0.0013268318,0.0030445736,0.00232305,0.00048978947,0.00022886797,0.008832515,0.0019675547,0.017160986,0.07727047,0.8799858,0.0032673008],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010644681,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00037904983,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8699032,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0036389427,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0026721307,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99975103},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2278178224","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v29i2.2894","title":"Die Class Proceedings Act van Ontario — ’n voorbeeld van wetgewing vir die regulering van Suid-Afrikaanse groepsgedingvoering","year":2004,"lang":"af","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Law, logistics, and international trade","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","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":"Promulgation; Legislation; Commission; Law; Statutory law; Class (philosophy); Theology; Political science; Sociology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.03768844067980392,"score_gpt":0.27359243293170205,"score_spread":0.23590399225189812,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2278178224","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":[0.89146125,0.00039190898,0.012016675,0.010160064,0.010445208,0.0008837832,0.000020580977,0.00025246214,0.07436808],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9846975,0.0001189362,0.0017458528,0.0010299995,0.007938229,0.00001811824,0.000008493591,0.000083079176,0.0043597915],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99325895,0.000009876827,0.0013722085,0.0011211535,0.0022998953,0.0019378965],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99713606,0.0001401542,0.0010373857,0.00026812078,0.0010477119,0.0003705514],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0033641816,0.0006581007,0.0006650473,0.00069815334,0.0033402592,0.0051544122,0.002023518,0.00025692023,0.00038376456],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0019248379,0.00058723125,0.00053440285,0.0007374005,0.0013602366,0.0068419403,0.00068181136,0.0013777574,0.00013855046],"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":[0.002170106,0.0044783805,0.15510696,0.003699013,0.0009871818,0.0013799582,0.00769921,0.015383585,0.089535035,0.66015744,0.026754035,0.032649115],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0044881357,0.00046021043,0.050578445,0.0030531562,0.00049253175,0.00023943643,0.0007814724,0.008714178,0.0048772674,0.13264433,0.79137444,0.002296377],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0025298633,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0025713046,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7646204,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0021731348,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00086429116,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996579},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2527759247","doi":"10.18820/24150517/jjs41.v1.5","title":"Die strafregtelike aanspreeklikheid van regspersone: Lesse uit Kanada","year":2016,"lang":"nl","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Regulation and Compliance Studies","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","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":"Political science","score_opus":0.03340037909171334,"score_gpt":0.2839854300215252,"score_spread":0.25058505092981187,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2527759247","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":[0.49107555,0.010946335,0.0533442,0.28394043,0.031985622,0.0026698404,0.00012445131,0.00045170126,0.12546186],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97616404,0.0007257411,0.00035308875,0.001603807,0.0041073677,0.000014311428,0.0000011543365,0.00003178934,0.016998673],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9958553,0.000020219373,0.00070122123,0.0006695912,0.0015819216,0.0011717689],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99776274,0.00017143936,0.00063149905,0.0003753321,0.0008434465,0.000215533],"candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0019060292,0.0003615213,0.00043077045,0.00032166726,0.002977295,0.0015403894,0.0013320171,0.00010096249,0.0013986814],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010058946,0.00022620031,0.00031753225,0.00090264,0.0014579796,0.003320851,0.00036633943,0.00028552374,0.0007435724],"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":[0.0005521728,0.0006317377,0.021216758,0.00053159567,0.00023550475,0.00020695433,0.00027746652,0.00007301398,0.01623805,0.09970107,0.38043424,0.47990143],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0018449203,0.00012071648,0.038920227,0.0008238523,0.00012832794,0.00004450206,0.00050435174,0.0009347615,0.00038667637,0.023573635,0.93201333,0.00070469733],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007419361,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00020688624,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.55157906,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00025972657,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00042510804,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99951416},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2795423455","doi":"10.18820/24150517/jjs42.v2.5","title":"Can law avoid creating culture and religion in its own image? The context for diversity, religion and culture in MEC for Education: KwaZulu-Natal and Others v Navaneethum Pillay: Reflections a decade later","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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; Diversity (politics); Context (archaeology); Sociology; Conscience; Law; Ambivalence; Political science; Epistemology; Social psychology; Psychology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.02303375758220615,"score_gpt":0.3737030121332806,"score_spread":0.35066925455107445,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2795423455","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":[0.91209143,0.0042726113,0.0007301741,0.05897841,0.0019669815,0.0035200918,0.00009628447,0.00006354464,0.018280452],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9935199,0.0004599567,0.0030554715,0.0012042228,0.0005232289,0.000037138205,9.823798e-7,0.00000773018,0.0011913432],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99859285,0.000083514395,0.00023531578,0.00032787945,0.00034679097,0.0004136671],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99894047,0.00025602133,0.00014242632,0.00008083753,0.0003402216,0.00024003648],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0018733185,0.00011735726,0.00015732252,0.00009144567,0.0040448885,0.00046603597,0.00031436453,0.0001310173,0.0000025374754],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0014728759,0.000076661265,0.00004512943,0.00042638966,0.0017037182,0.0006045049,0.00015619726,0.00027303433,7.0783636e-7],"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":[0.000479403,0.00015109428,0.005430351,0.00009705172,0.00002213364,0.0000050963617,0.7717371,0.0000026413265,0.006992509,0.18731166,0.022232262,0.005538699],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0017105906,0.0007598132,0.0008150693,0.0003224236,0.000052514297,0.00008184877,0.025127022,0.00031891954,0.001719543,0.0965761,0.87213653,0.00037961974],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0015223572,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.012451988,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8499043,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002239379,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00031129114,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9972517},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7147116020","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v30i2.2915","title":"Revisiting the judicial role in the allocation of healthcare resources: on deference, democratic dialogue and deliberation","year":2005,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Adjudication; Deliberation; Argument (complex analysis); Health care; Deliberative democracy; Judicial review; Function (biology); Value (mathematics)","score_opus":0.028953187304734385,"score_gpt":0.34485750977645174,"score_spread":0.31590432247171735,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7147116020","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":[0.8404209,0.0046833633,0.00065216667,0.14482984,0.0008063396,0.001333023,0.00001584287,0.000013786321,0.007244764],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99424773,0.0005290417,0.0005932311,0.001699189,0.002851074,0.000021996602,7.866334e-7,0.000008608333,0.000048337315],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99467105,0.0010507893,0.0010241931,0.00042071327,0.00207721,0.00075601845],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99657106,0.0017025406,0.00071068195,0.00027725054,0.00044509425,0.00029336885],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014430342,0.00019372937,0.00031017466,0.00018402447,0.004213507,0.0007639553,0.0014675669,0.00015712346,0.000018781688],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0049576256,0.0001119012,0.0001183596,0.0018288502,0.002552282,0.00079750776,0.00011036037,0.00088674674,0.000006960363],"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":[0.00024488918,0.00020578079,0.002774253,0.00007681208,0.000014602131,0.000004722747,0.460911,0.0008923098,0.0006444992,0.1576194,0.00042806295,0.37618366],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004111279,0.0044849687,0.089143075,0.0040168045,0.0004511758,0.00016316278,0.13396844,0.0765381,0.0015327856,0.2745681,0.4090304,0.0019916883],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004485213,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008583584,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.40860236,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00034423784,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010252482,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9970829},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7147147736","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v31i1.2918","title":"Polygyny and HIV/AIDS: A health and human rights approach","year":2006,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Marriage and Sexual Relationships","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Polygyny; Dignity; Human rights; Redress; Human sexuality; Population; Domestic violence; Reproductive health; Condom","score_opus":0.039657513158494834,"score_gpt":0.3619056714644127,"score_spread":0.3222481583059179,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7147147736","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":[0.917418,0.005110692,0.010016038,0.010221369,0.0014618362,0.0013004733,0.000034911423,0.000052247997,0.054384418],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9883051,0.00013694869,0.004014115,0.0003013866,0.0014127959,0.000008825665,0.0000028340778,0.000010332333,0.005807699],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955206,0.0003508755,0.00081149786,0.00067221595,0.0014662659,0.0011785347],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9969757,0.00038227843,0.00047367823,0.00017124855,0.00020497199,0.0017921294],"candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0074550873,0.0002474662,0.00042118505,0.00030590873,0.016508788,0.0015820345,0.0005813182,0.00018686272,0.00007891799],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005344611,0.00019308721,0.0001092468,0.0010609999,0.003954875,0.0011502937,0.00015075307,0.00067995966,0.000005871416],"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":[0.00004129827,0.00033693685,0.004284188,0.00006915924,0.000013227311,0.0000080888485,0.007897517,0.0000052697255,0.0002624456,0.9721749,0.007938943,0.006968051],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0027543593,0.0026975279,0.01210075,0.000273432,0.000101083184,0.0003876707,0.009099726,0.003235601,0.00007730501,0.5408096,0.42733473,0.0011282562],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009928386,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00042271125,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4313653,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002589348,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013040379,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99945444},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7147256335","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v32i2.2944","title":"Gronde vir die weiering van toegang tot inligting soos van toepassing op openbare instellings (deel I)","year":2007,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Legislation; Appeal; Freedom of information; Promotion (chess); Interpretation (philosophy); Statutory law","score_opus":0.03694009050939181,"score_gpt":0.37725761096028226,"score_spread":0.3403175204508905,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7147256335","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":[0.7392057,0.006700093,0.087206766,0.0071000145,0.022566684,0.0025298982,0.000045732977,0.00034727133,0.1342978],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97393876,0.00037632784,0.016335648,0.00077161775,0.006081738,0.000012106702,0.000001395646,0.00008821212,0.0023941768],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9856891,0.0002856835,0.0024711532,0.0016688235,0.005156644,0.0047286055],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99161094,0.0014220701,0.0015255095,0.0006908732,0.0010973073,0.0036532998],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.02234779,0.0008112666,0.001043761,0.0007436384,0.014801261,0.005149707,0.004972332,0.0006070331,0.00064544246],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0077709514,0.00074688246,0.00073330855,0.0038968055,0.005452647,0.0059623597,0.0013685698,0.0026521427,0.00019902029],"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":[0.00095762534,0.0013797985,0.005777076,0.0004140923,0.00021662416,0.0011312882,0.3160591,0.0019521171,0.03454825,0.031239593,0.0018743183,0.6044501],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0025864032,0.001202351,0.0017855859,0.0019508686,0.00029994227,0.00021929528,0.034897823,0.010907498,0.018752415,0.024023874,0.9003451,0.0030288752],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00033824894,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00024914864,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.89847076,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0028766987,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0031932862,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99964875},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7147615037","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v42i1.3807","title":"Religion and the exercise of public authority","year":2017,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Religion and Society Interactions","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":"Variety (cybernetics); Politics; State (computer science); Neutrality; Ethnography; Public authority","score_opus":0.05397175854745563,"score_gpt":0.40553120756813466,"score_spread":0.35155944902067904,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7147615037","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":[0.4954104,0.004813624,0.0034948797,0.42552522,0.018331602,0.0017000355,0.000027608552,0.00003218944,0.050664436],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96564513,0.031510495,0.00031278917,0.00028448703,0.0005643801,0.0000101465575,9.876522e-8,0.0000058554724,0.0016666442],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99653643,0.00022913824,0.0006588965,0.00034050946,0.0015368616,0.00069815887],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9958737,0.00063917215,0.001199118,0.0004977053,0.0009533738,0.00083695265],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.01575345,0.00015304158,0.00039179242,0.000091017544,0.021074701,0.003509076,0.0023170225,0.00017427815,0.000066017645],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011066737,0.00009359509,0.00048246738,0.00038748884,0.019630145,0.0018827581,0.00035036315,0.0006914952,0.000009523343],"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":[0.00021444455,0.0002142967,0.0015681825,0.000036979993,0.00003789104,0.000003167385,0.013617458,0.0000015933789,0.0003914435,0.8988399,0.029121812,0.05595287],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0052240063,0.00049344444,0.018258551,0.00072257925,0.00033309526,0.00013666754,0.011872823,0.0061025387,0.00072200305,0.37469015,0.5808122,0.0006319261],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009213605,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00010780111,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5516904,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00016224167,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001639545,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975254},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7147707594","doi":"10.38140/jjs.v28i1.2858","title":"Groepsgedingvoering — die voorstel van die Suid-Afrikaanse Regskommissie vir die sertifisering van ’n groepsgeding","year":2003,"lang":"","type":"article","venue":"Journal for Juridical Science","topic":"Dispute Resolution and Class Actions","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","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":"Promulgation; Commission; Legislation; Certification; Class (philosophy); Class action","score_opus":0.03937184074087862,"score_gpt":0.2945533595771468,"score_spread":0.25518151883626816,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7147707594","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":[0.45332378,0.009201897,0.0805669,0.0202622,0.045595966,0.0031057128,0.000048423768,0.0008542408,0.38704088],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98399293,0.0016573314,0.0012161472,0.0011507809,0.004217482,0.00004953622,0.000004361842,0.00013869953,0.007572719],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9910974,0.000080164704,0.0018215539,0.0014420676,0.002513039,0.0030457687],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9958452,0.00030220445,0.0011519098,0.00067657925,0.0011157091,0.00090840587],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0063949074,0.0008950207,0.00086934667,0.0011892769,0.008899621,0.0065002497,0.0018275414,0.00033555028,0.0016628848],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0048017637,0.0008075003,0.0008890634,0.0019962871,0.0012241876,0.008920441,0.00066035835,0.0016197839,0.00042004438],"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":[0.001949752,0.006925345,0.02706262,0.004664136,0.0012767274,0.0022111135,0.0025150867,0.006820964,0.1562059,0.41869125,0.047033563,0.32464355],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0016722871,0.00012384258,0.0032449276,0.00083553843,0.00032443946,0.00018559399,0.0010869153,0.015535865,0.001845094,0.009495026,0.9644214,0.0012290931],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000054116517,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000055532073,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.91738784,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009423278,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00073723815,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994376},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}