{"meta":{"query_hash":"ae59bc868ce7","filters":{"venue":"Journal of Controversial Ideas"},"cohort_total":3,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":3,"exported":3,"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/ae59bc868ce7","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Journal+of+Controversial+Ideas"},"results":[{"id":"W4225136396","doi":"10.35995/jci02010007","title":"Figleaves Right and Left: A Case-Study of Viewpoint Diversity Applied to the Philosophy of Language","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Controversial Ideas","topic":"Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":16,"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":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; Canada Research Chairs","keywords":"Diversity (politics); Politics; Epistemology; Social science; Sociology; Statement (logic); Public relations; Political science; Law; Philosophy; Anthropology","score_opus":0.031485674297283585,"score_gpt":0.24885086865458853,"score_spread":0.21736519435730495,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4225136396","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":[0.9874598,0.0005048618,0.0000141392375,0.0017682923,0.0005052602,0.00026510173,0.000060199476,0.0000036659083,0.009418692],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9986146,0.00000763376,0.000011421439,0.00064543367,0.0004514022,0.0000010079151,4.904291e-7,0.0000056794784,0.0002623369],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989657,0.00017113042,0.00034932068,0.000085417145,0.00032829077,0.00010016248],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998893,0.00026658026,0.00049531856,0.00013532187,0.00015557674,0.000054163254],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006493268,0.00009062388,0.00039075204,0.00009750453,0.0005038418,0.000017116188,0.0002095302,0.000018949833,0.0002395067],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000052381296,0.00006324233,0.00013909092,0.00003042702,0.00018132493,0.0000762247,0.00026927068,0.00028970983,9.578523e-7],"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":[0.0012048167,0.00081309595,0.0006584784,0.0001025638,0.0008360782,0.0008466316,0.74064547,0.00017201716,0.0005483896,0.24868292,0.0047974247,0.0006921062],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.009944774,0.0070484956,0.0011233852,0.00007090052,0.0016294892,0.00096473884,0.8203569,0.000033617478,0.00040428838,0.045710914,0.11225022,0.0004623022],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008567793,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001142169,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.20297201,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000027295266,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000037257018,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.38751948},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4308415793","doi":"10.35995/jci02020004","title":"Will Moralization of Science Lead to “Better” Science?","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Controversial Ideas","topic":"Ethics in medical practice","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Université du Québec à Montréal","funders":"National Institutes of Health","keywords":"Harassment; Political science; Foundation (evidence); Psychology; Public relations; Sociology; Social psychology; Law","score_opus":0.04857680857281557,"score_gpt":0.4730880520497666,"score_spread":0.424511243476951,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4308415793","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":[0.87100375,0.0001762127,0.01499298,0.07194481,0.0109516345,0.0006671532,0.000016516577,0.000021608,0.030225312],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9876374,0.000010691205,0.0016581295,0.009845869,0.0005110654,0.0000038475227,2.4550337e-7,0.000008493699,0.00032426594],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9947363,0.00091271487,0.000811681,0.00017152113,0.0029506662,0.00041707646],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9938957,0.0023429429,0.0012481598,0.00024652318,0.0019343564,0.00033230713],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.020738535,0.00008011686,0.00029383355,0.00063586835,0.002481896,0.000019639998,0.0010440893,0.000053345582,0.00064070645],"category_scores_gemma":[0.035266608,0.000071496914,0.000072688585,0.0016535713,0.0013334907,0.0014558927,0.0004935864,0.0022542418,0.00001916758],"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":[0.0029041707,0.00049835374,0.020276982,0.00018951541,0.00009128925,0.00013604805,0.026715713,0.0026983959,0.3417848,0.531257,0.06725024,0.006197515],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0154121965,0.0061150943,0.026479518,0.00095406006,0.00046982558,0.00021421803,0.08152442,0.0042531756,0.005834986,0.27780354,0.58002126,0.0009176805],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00011743857,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000009673541,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.51277107,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0008187275,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0042165862,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9988167},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4412070501","doi":"10.63466/jci05010002","title":"How Ideology, Not Science, Determined Teaching Children to Read in Ontario","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Controversial Ideas","topic":"Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"University of Toronto","keywords":"Ideology; Mathematics education; Psychology; Sociology; Computer science; Political science; Politics","score_opus":0.035164743862754276,"score_gpt":0.35819915858947765,"score_spread":0.3230344147267234,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4412070501","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":[0.9091805,0.00010413623,0.00021358761,0.03394571,0.0025870083,0.00014067431,9.04637e-7,0.0000127498015,0.053814713],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9882269,0.0000033962192,0.00056213257,0.0014614589,0.000377844,0.000001092467,1.4917754e-7,0.0000036907993,0.009363374],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9984777,0.00016709151,0.00032254573,0.0001724011,0.00046615192,0.00039408405],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99895513,0.00031384995,0.00021338327,0.000114903065,0.00019257181,0.00021018136],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0023807148,0.00009567879,0.00033353348,0.00068487675,0.00048462284,0.00016907183,0.00056954846,0.000088954825,0.000033134533],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0035479572,0.00009095354,0.00012040438,0.00038955928,0.0005129788,0.0004195779,0.00004729588,0.0005770977,0.000003470334],"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":[0.0011672877,0.00040044004,0.5129713,0.000006581466,0.0001337187,0.000107798194,0.081606895,0.00005431185,0.0024092894,0.33646747,0.019186638,0.04548826],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0028419578,0.00045736445,0.3768437,0.00014839618,0.000094272895,0.00001660379,0.013796199,0.0000049901932,0.000056502853,0.0068370234,0.5986039,0.00029910437],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.13667974,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.29569742,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5794172,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001681897,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0038059417,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8690692},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}