{"meta":{"query_hash":"f2fc3eb4b315","filters":{"venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies"},"cohort_total":38,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":38,"exported":38,"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/f2fc3eb4b315","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Journal+of+Empirical+Legal+Studies"},"results":[{"id":"W1536165996","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01210.x","title":"Do Joint Parenting Laws Make Any Difference?","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Family Dynamics and Relationships","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":24,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Entitlement (fair division); Presumption; Child custody; Discretion; Mediation; Law; Family law; Conciliation; Political science; Psychology; Criminology; Economics","score_opus":0.2996618889400789,"score_gpt":0.40561464637138017,"score_spread":0.10595275743130128,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1536165996","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.936802,0.0048720413,0.0024956283,0.01979221,0.00040389792,0.000104553255,0.0015479093,0.00005216823,0.033929493],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99537176,0.00086911005,0.0003118269,0.0013411752,0.00018106062,0.00003980406,0.00054058636,0.000018315463,0.0013263859],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99138653,0.0034709622,0.00056705036,0.0016571869,0.0016036782,0.0013145332],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9255004,0.040591095,0.024504151,0.0052538346,0.0018246911,0.002325813],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010071324,0.00029832058,0.0011714229,0.001347506,0.0014744203,0.0037283218,0.0017264262,0.0024177055,0.015040424],"category_scores_gemma":[0.065226614,0.00039087542,0.0011611622,0.0026555853,0.003717586,0.0055454504,0.002271989,0.003527628,0.0014456869],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00028108555,0.00047741557,0.916698,0.0001292348,0.00066698436,0.000596181,0.0032232902,0.0008116773,0.0002863494,0.025375081,0.004126246,0.0473284],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000116378666,0.00044700445,0.9367759,0.00023906218,0.00065011356,0.0002755654,0.009303805,0.0027043258,0.00036392294,0.02870651,0.020370392,0.000047024685],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.015477992,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01717341,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.015477992,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0011510245,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001433823,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05326289},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1574187393","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01241.x","title":"Property Rights, Resource Access, and Long‐Run Growth","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Natural Resources and Economic Development","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Property rights; Supreme court; Economics; Stock (firearms); Resource (disambiguation); Per capita; Supreme Court Decisions; Proxy (statistics); Microeconomics; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.1521234812437365,"score_gpt":0.3030523322902792,"score_spread":0.15092885104654272,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1574187393","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9754362,0.001906529,0.0036239685,0.0021793002,0.00003310661,0.000035750043,0.0019779583,0.0000605792,0.014746509],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9968395,0.0006291887,0.00028921323,0.00004428335,0.000014532704,0.000011094841,0.00073566206,0.0000045550423,0.0014319306],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9995247,0.000057175344,0.000023692655,0.00007347854,0.00013352915,0.00018731758],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9966119,0.0013778061,0.001073841,0.00013278484,0.0004064859,0.00039714391],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012353626,0.00043739198,0.0004516205,0.0012208335,0.0012904013,0.0030259802,0.00068749563,0.000963859,0.0030308692],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0055762646,0.00014356522,0.0006184268,0.0019292728,0.001981237,0.0012021025,0.0012176324,0.0014986364,0.00016232696],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00035552218,0.00032070253,0.70916283,0.00012996748,0.0003662377,0.0008144936,0.0009995957,0.17907804,0.0015582739,0.076359175,0.0021071506,0.028748054],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000059043665,0.00018495586,0.7788951,0.00009293294,0.0002653907,0.00015586302,0.0016488325,0.15016125,0.001972189,0.056086212,0.010351473,0.00012685951],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.70347583,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.70164835,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.70347583,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012584783,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00552559,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5965409},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1932150760","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2012.01272.x","title":"Race and Selective Enforcement in Public Housing","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Crime Patterns and Interventions","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":40,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Trespass; Enforcement; Law enforcement; Race (biology); Criminology; Public housing; Business; Nexus (standard); Law; Political science; Engineering; Sociology","score_opus":0.2193499402849032,"score_gpt":0.4822578547904881,"score_spread":0.2629079145055849,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1932150760","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99838424,0.00010916065,0.000037655645,0.00027966374,0.000005794645,0.000004556927,0.000018509136,0.000001177924,0.0011591932],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99966943,0.000044579396,0.00001731407,0.000028950853,0.000005993629,0.0000034978204,0.00001492982,5.993026e-7,0.00021473091],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99830985,0.0007394297,0.0000607092,0.00016694721,0.00025020094,0.00047289417],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9950346,0.00055999355,0.0030899441,0.00025533268,0.00023800303,0.0008222374],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013988634,0.000114413524,0.00024835058,0.0006090489,0.0011206911,0.0010171599,0.00048970326,0.0004937885,0.0028664663],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0054570767,0.00018084384,0.00025584758,0.00077975425,0.0009759951,0.0006549294,0.0013603598,0.0006463776,0.00016947392],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001395281,0.0007967224,0.9797921,0.000014334351,0.00006205827,0.00011407081,0.0017372429,0.00030240763,0.00021599594,0.0014671071,0.000679825,0.014678558],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000064384717,0.00008814262,0.99749136,0.000017600956,0.000013474429,0.00003852058,0.0012412942,0.0003642986,0.00007413155,0.00020231267,0.0004590954,0.000003286158],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.038795035,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.061851885,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.038795035,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00140109,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012304303,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.077138424},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1941399481","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01212.x","title":"Incorporation Law, Ownership Structure, and Firm Value: Evidence from Canada","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Corporate Finance and Governance","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":16,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Université de Montréal; HEC Montréal","funders":"","keywords":"Expropriation; Endogeneity; Corporate governance; Shareholder; Voting; Business; Value (mathematics); Enterprise value; Context (archaeology); Accounting; Economics; Law; Market economy; Finance; Econometrics; Political science; Politics","score_opus":0.11444881419225482,"score_gpt":0.2854516471605041,"score_spread":0.17100283296824925,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1941399481","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9771721,0.0031993347,0.00032928577,0.0019051711,0.000022573871,0.00004306814,0.006179723,0.0000146136745,0.011134156],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9932287,0.0012107341,0.00021585388,0.00020358861,0.000011389826,0.000008188167,0.0027889046,0.000006007995,0.0023266065],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.998757,0.00008686515,0.00004411227,0.00017196217,0.0005556473,0.00038432115],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9902721,0.0015974895,0.002506662,0.0003098517,0.003921859,0.0013920149],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0010684293,0.00032365366,0.00046030132,0.002801465,0.003625831,0.0021589098,0.001254371,0.0005950394,0.0030526419],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0054918393,0.00021616407,0.0005015109,0.008342399,0.0014108919,0.00073786406,0.0009825245,0.00079955236,0.00021521766],"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":[0.000114725124,0.00008383573,0.97245604,0.000116929754,0.00010886285,0.00034560813,0.0026477387,0.00050347846,0.00018260606,0.0023589362,0.0057605994,0.01532067],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000013930016,0.00002195078,0.9881825,0.00009951997,0.00007255549,0.00006410625,0.0031593016,0.0009068282,0.00018666437,0.00017126543,0.0070966296,0.000024767707],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9976991,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9989182,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03932596,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03932596,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.036779583,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.28533113},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1972118969","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2009.01145.x","title":"Universal Health Insurance and the Effect of Cost Containment on Mortality Rates: Strokes and Heart Attacks in Japan","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Global Health Care Issues","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Incentive; Subsidy; Quarter (Canadian coin); Business; Medicine; Medical emergency; Actuarial science; Economics; Geography","score_opus":0.0899652005005557,"score_gpt":0.5237263794844247,"score_spread":0.433761178983869,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1972118969","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.98944235,0.0031739802,0.0003248615,0.0023128456,0.00004237047,0.000026225409,0.0005905362,0.000014029112,0.0040728487],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9986307,0.0004464736,0.00008284695,0.00017453187,0.00003522614,0.000008068432,0.00029906436,0.000002698507,0.00032034807],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99801207,0.00061370176,0.00015697486,0.00028822824,0.00025491443,0.0006740394],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9883642,0.0025167952,0.005426801,0.00030955987,0.0008598401,0.0025228157],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0017122631,0.0005332807,0.00079887337,0.0023036145,0.0008624311,0.0023157839,0.0006884571,0.001148587,0.0034449613],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009592023,0.00033123506,0.0013653662,0.002258944,0.0011035695,0.0012802253,0.0024678973,0.001290772,0.00018872779],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00015514418,0.00011725716,0.99131256,0.000057930643,0.00039595793,0.00022992236,0.00016664458,0.0013186588,0.00008270088,0.0012142148,0.00077259797,0.0041764434],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000035604873,0.000082090955,0.9949287,0.000030370498,0.0003902328,0.00006980863,0.00076436484,0.0024837565,0.000065489454,0.000620212,0.00051328196,0.000015992548],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.09567676,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09067039,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09567676,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0029980196,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0015723829,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.19023973},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1974865494","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00081.x","title":"Do Defendants Pay What Juries Award? Post‐Verdict Haircuts in Texas Medical Malpractice Cases, 1988–2003","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues","field":"Health Professions","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":"Kellogg's (Canada)","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Plaintiff; Medical malpractice; Damages; Psychology; Law; Medicine; Actuarial science; Malpractice; Business; Political science","score_opus":0.13477822103301826,"score_gpt":0.52219806871887,"score_spread":0.3874198476858517,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1974865494","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99746513,0.00017516794,0.000040417926,0.0007372472,0.000013739775,0.0000122952715,0.00021189661,0.0000038883904,0.0013401726],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.998064,0.00014232042,0.00004652179,0.00015168203,0.000037486618,0.000016227581,0.00026883115,0.0000018556593,0.0012710382],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982889,0.00032066935,0.00017339659,0.000203475,0.0005628961,0.00045059805],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98396,0.002856237,0.00989854,0.0004950299,0.0013829258,0.0014072909],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002525421,0.00010789368,0.00021563504,0.0016263966,0.0010456772,0.0009870356,0.0005328272,0.0008837972,0.0030590654],"category_scores_gemma":[0.016182475,0.00030108073,0.00023256706,0.0014551661,0.00059490924,0.0007085236,0.0009615563,0.00084949494,0.0004671844],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00022366935,0.00018537075,0.9761212,0.000020706331,0.000041134634,0.00029069005,0.0021144934,0.00032699652,0.00025447286,0.00057246356,0.00443739,0.0154113285],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000049140317,0.000033555352,0.9985435,0.0000072640823,0.0000042447014,0.0000622053,0.00051193184,0.00009837366,0.00005312598,0.0000827913,0.0005941807,0.0000039338993],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02884436,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06312453,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02884436,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0025526504,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001124036,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0573529},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2002433399","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2009.01162.x","title":"Capital Flows and Hedge Fund Regulation","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Corporate Finance and Governance","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":37,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Business; Hedge fund; Finance; Capitalization; Open-end fund; Investment fund; Robustness (evolution); Cost of capital; Economics; Microeconomics; Institutional investor; Profit (economics); Market liquidity","score_opus":0.07175906070194905,"score_gpt":0.31300027080744014,"score_spread":0.2412412101054911,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2002433399","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8391036,0.0031709636,0.013146232,0.0032919517,0.000090189016,0.00011197732,0.0005665026,0.0001376541,0.1403809],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9969946,0.00032189634,0.00045427488,0.00024173157,0.000046692105,0.000021557158,0.000090096284,0.000006404024,0.001822642],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9971112,0.00070861867,0.00022339307,0.00036408758,0.0009794626,0.0006132781],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9841558,0.004907527,0.0086176535,0.0009850698,0.000982455,0.00035151688],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0028627152,0.00024369803,0.0002796609,0.0024205684,0.0007890317,0.0036123246,0.00047203663,0.0010735497,0.0021509524],"category_scores_gemma":[0.014655168,0.00021456815,0.0005388172,0.0013284986,0.002886345,0.0016837496,0.0015386371,0.0012416182,0.00017350525],"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":[0.00027879523,0.00020174579,0.17180064,0.00016590598,0.00028282774,0.00075778767,0.0015010822,0.031586915,0.0029199424,0.72396624,0.004490156,0.062047936],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013910525,0.00041732725,0.60498464,0.0003788797,0.00034805824,0.0008188052,0.001262423,0.024538975,0.012877089,0.26574254,0.08828208,0.00021009803],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006665814,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0040237145,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.006665814,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0024390868,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0014701014,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.017696857},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2045704255","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2005.00034.x","title":"The Irrelevance of Direct Bankruptcy Costs to the Firm's Financial Reorganization Decision","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Banking stability, regulation, efficiency","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":21,"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":"Bankruptcy; Business; Finance; Indirect costs; Economics; Microeconomics; Actuarial science; Accounting","score_opus":0.0359171997451788,"score_gpt":0.3109992275759567,"score_spread":0.2750820278307779,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2045704255","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99648005,0.00013883061,0.00052922143,0.0001527412,0.0000024107305,0.000021453232,0.0004824044,0.0000060504635,0.0021869363],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9990262,0.00006146473,0.00009832355,0.00000920348,0.000005425917,0.0000055432174,0.00033513398,0.0000012692477,0.0004573379],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9982539,0.00031296015,0.00013463959,0.00023489018,0.0006085341,0.00045507948],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.92722505,0.041995995,0.023207355,0.0023594396,0.0034743939,0.001737713],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0031815337,0.00026757488,0.0004676179,0.0024201102,0.0004799917,0.0024022816,0.0008459952,0.0009124124,0.003949858],"category_scores_gemma":[0.036352377,0.0004516928,0.00051802467,0.002269185,0.0010854924,0.0012353372,0.00073407573,0.0016050684,0.00033738947],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00031265386,0.00014478665,0.95930433,0.000026930185,0.00017816827,0.00013120337,0.00015651408,0.025784628,0.00033723545,0.003047443,0.00039667328,0.010179386],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026855761,0.00009522057,0.958199,0.000016114003,0.000097946075,0.0001259978,0.00029197018,0.03806509,0.0004637928,0.001937849,0.00064965384,0.000030555508],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.12633371,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.17570515,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.12633371,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0063880063,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016822882,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.25119674},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2077351741","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2008.00128.x","title":"Medical Malpractice Review Panels and Medical Liability System Cost, Timeliness, and Efficiency: A Cross‐Sectional Study","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Sunnybrook Health Science Centre","funders":"","keywords":"Malpractice; Actuarial science; Panel data; Medical malpractice; Statutory law; Tort reform; Payment; Tort; Defensive medicine; Business; Medicine; Liability; Cross-sectional study; Accounting; Economics; Finance; Econometrics; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.22107375875981147,"score_gpt":0.5481335006616314,"score_spread":0.32705974190181986,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2077351741","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9989868,0.00014172717,0.00020049982,0.000060317514,0.00000667674,0.000018867064,0.0002596272,0.0000031005725,0.00032238086],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9988476,0.00008874304,0.00019881698,0.00005363614,0.000025174599,0.000026425685,0.0004364773,0.0000028651632,0.00032034313],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99730575,0.001430294,0.00020737837,0.0003769453,0.00040110582,0.00027852156],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97302824,0.010605552,0.010262152,0.0020971007,0.0020180135,0.0019888608],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0048286696,0.00028609153,0.0003230017,0.0014003596,0.00054116163,0.0010045939,0.0007048055,0.00093137234,0.003631386],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015198939,0.000719096,0.00067215104,0.0010711647,0.00043817525,0.0010587662,0.00075927796,0.0013270456,0.0006980943],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006436865,0.00025629107,0.99860376,0.0000034566497,0.00009392632,0.000019970621,0.00008077458,0.00005137822,0.00003392488,0.000034557845,0.00010705976,0.00065051706],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001013482,0.00034752965,0.9985202,0.00000639395,0.000064312466,0.00013637092,0.00018667693,0.0003731604,0.000063398955,0.000029614768,0.00025665952,0.000005622455],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0053160284,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0055986787,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0053160284,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00058505626,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006252132,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.025536776},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2084571232","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00122.x","title":"Alternative Methods of Appellate Review in Trade Remedy Cases: Examining Results of U.S. Judicial and NAFTA Binational Review of U.S. Agency Decisions from 1989 to 2005","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"World Trade Organization Law","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":"Agency (philosophy); Free trade agreement; Political science; Law; Settlement (finance); Judicial review; Dispute resolution; Standard of review; Law and economics; Economics; Free trade; International trade; Sociology; Payment","score_opus":0.23842577969837625,"score_gpt":0.4881777595488758,"score_spread":0.24975197985049957,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2084571232","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.76950675,0.0301291,0.014251991,0.011831932,0.00046247212,0.0017151709,0.0024268737,0.00013396534,0.16954167],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97772455,0.0042738756,0.0066723865,0.0032022183,0.00031031654,0.0010622812,0.0007810695,0.00007639662,0.005896953],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.70580345,0.17678651,0.0185487,0.011548886,0.07898626,0.008326213],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.1995999,0.6240172,0.057920486,0.017147636,0.099897906,0.0014169707],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.25013953,0.0004431857,0.0011993713,0.021943422,0.0038067573,0.0107117165,0.002631723,0.004214451,0.0023111007],"category_scores_gemma":[0.57463336,0.0010887136,0.0018489099,0.020335145,0.006867601,0.010330054,0.0044116317,0.002886376,0.00078003143],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0023064455,0.0007396405,0.52149296,0.0034658867,0.002005623,0.0011059599,0.13090006,0.004296369,0.0016741817,0.09923864,0.030510828,0.20226347],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00057557615,0.0019200093,0.7834248,0.0049712565,0.0016580562,0.0011042407,0.048930973,0.010415824,0.006181073,0.022717904,0.11754968,0.000550684],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.047317,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.12435181,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.25013953,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.015097283,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.010461052,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.92471147},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2107540882","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2010.01207.x","title":"Settlement at Policy Limits and the Duty to Settle: Evidence from Texas","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Kellogg's (Canada)","funders":"","keywords":"Settlement (finance); Plaintiff; Actuarial science; Liability; Damages; Duty; Harm; Tort; Economics; Duration (music); Incentive; Liability insurance; Business; Insurance policy; Law; Payment; Finance; Political science","score_opus":0.3485872869177174,"score_gpt":0.5371381870422434,"score_spread":0.18855090012452597,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2107540882","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9932172,0.00043994558,0.00023051092,0.00092913845,0.0000082475,0.000021312298,0.0005261082,0.000005189039,0.0046224026],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9962943,0.00065047067,0.00016278478,0.00029378265,0.000036492253,0.000018698507,0.0007437108,0.000006415487,0.0017933252],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978383,0.0005468899,0.00021070513,0.00036723452,0.0006696705,0.00036718338],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.93915117,0.01727876,0.03681237,0.0019694876,0.0028212601,0.0019669367],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003138668,0.0002736181,0.00039651056,0.0020263533,0.0014141647,0.0020227635,0.0013238196,0.0009784326,0.007989952],"category_scores_gemma":[0.020104537,0.0003639211,0.00060934643,0.0028221782,0.0016387531,0.001439256,0.0020023726,0.0013619991,0.0007279002],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00073929253,0.0006366352,0.96433073,0.0001364424,0.00028187767,0.0007147782,0.0030725875,0.0024591167,0.0003679454,0.0031752728,0.0055506965,0.018534608],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000072090384,0.00033325914,0.9857471,0.00015833098,0.00012903412,0.000334894,0.0036150345,0.002143195,0.00029477896,0.0012534254,0.005893514,0.000025401032],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.038339626,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.055849295,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.038339626,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0027777478,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0018291222,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07623291},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2110943459","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01239.x","title":"Mechanisms for Eliciting Cooperation in Counterterrorism Policing: Evidence from the United Kingdom","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Crime Patterns and Interventions","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":133,"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; Open Society Institute; National Science Foundation","keywords":"Procedural justice; Terrorism; Legitimacy; Law enforcement; Perception; Sample (material); Economic Justice; Criminology; Political science; Community policing; Enforcement; Social psychology; Psychology; Law; Politics","score_opus":0.5508604380521529,"score_gpt":0.5116323480429372,"score_spread":0.03922809000921568,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2110943459","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9934407,0.0008967514,0.00021920579,0.0002598485,0.0000068259897,0.000021875834,0.00001869912,0.0000024331066,0.00513363],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987943,0.0005780042,0.00024146661,0.00008352108,0.0000026782648,0.000015882357,0.000015492193,0.00000288682,0.00026570522],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9891005,0.008367769,0.00046432554,0.00048565486,0.0009205767,0.0006612258],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.953844,0.024638368,0.014613803,0.002746863,0.0030470868,0.0011097887],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004999231,0.00030326238,0.00040974555,0.00085971574,0.0016785222,0.0014743691,0.0006065429,0.0008251447,0.0024015354],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023864936,0.00044415187,0.00033553992,0.0006716922,0.0025809398,0.00064097764,0.0024844937,0.0005026701,0.00041890593],"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":[0.0035988197,0.00076534925,0.79539853,0.0016557018,0.0005048827,0.0020525942,0.09251397,0.00084330654,0.006229463,0.0035391708,0.0015249599,0.091373235],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00019299214,0.00091882027,0.9524395,0.00050397374,0.00017411809,0.00072313996,0.03439747,0.0004506973,0.0017849563,0.0005922638,0.0077532227,0.00006890652],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.046632305,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.07368274,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.046632305,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0021980277,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016116035,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0927217},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2111199343","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2004.00022.x","title":"Disappearing Trials? A Comparative Perspective","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":59,"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; Perspective (graphical); Incidence (geometry); Geography; Period (music); Political science; Criminology; Law; Sociology","score_opus":0.27536854473739786,"score_gpt":0.39585725643722913,"score_spread":0.12048871169983127,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2111199343","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"reporting","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":"reporting","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3302506,0.038858876,0.002006175,0.05885778,0.0005854488,0.0000406677,0.00082637684,0.000028516108,0.56854564],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96529114,0.01265074,0.000531915,0.002928676,0.00046662398,0.000023611161,0.0002932495,0.000027145767,0.017786916],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99613047,0.0014924523,0.0002088814,0.0004998229,0.00070589443,0.0009625246],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9816458,0.0073271696,0.0028039056,0.0013673853,0.0045611574,0.002294531],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004320897,0.0001286191,0.0007135971,0.0048141847,0.0025671255,0.0068308874,0.0014627499,0.0014182951,0.012557306],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01963994,0.00016535183,0.00025365528,0.007834618,0.00987446,0.0058887177,0.0020035878,0.001836185,0.00048290772],"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":[0.00017914482,0.000067041256,0.032648392,0.0004932705,0.000035634555,0.0007305432,0.028123872,0.0004752414,0.0003678075,0.8115012,0.019012613,0.10636526],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006257997,0.00022302654,0.29986644,0.0010102151,0.000082591636,0.0015475036,0.08438252,0.0008136008,0.00032157532,0.1121354,0.49949488,0.00005965151],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.13138972,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.19190346,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9956791,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0076361806,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005269936,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2612499},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2139397807","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2004.00007.x","title":"A Broken System: The Persistent Patterns of Reversals of Death Sentences in the United States","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":43,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Sunnybrook Health Science Centre","funders":"","keywords":"Sentence; State (computer science); Psychology; Political science; Econometrics; Economics; Computer science; Natural language processing","score_opus":0.10445471226182046,"score_gpt":0.3953407969997022,"score_spread":0.29088608473788174,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2139397807","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99718,0.00018511007,0.00011786089,0.00028639362,0.00000937336,0.000013221584,0.0015804617,0.000011474376,0.0006161151],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9976681,0.000068505506,0.000110430294,0.00004564778,0.0000063205425,0.000010521722,0.001910017,0.000004874151,0.00017562696],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9980204,0.00059706834,0.00033480203,0.00037665898,0.00034551017,0.00032562006],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98162776,0.003524538,0.010241733,0.0015268936,0.0019597178,0.0011193036],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020209586,0.0001413848,0.00031499905,0.0028718945,0.0009595993,0.0013299626,0.0007654732,0.0006461944,0.0019497604],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015660724,0.00039496622,0.00027723395,0.002775684,0.00081232056,0.00094855536,0.0019970702,0.0014162402,0.00036096718],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007784815,0.000052889838,0.9917074,0.00001551118,0.000047198788,0.000071145,0.0011557967,0.00015033412,0.00012275111,0.0002764894,0.001146608,0.0051759877],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000025296672,0.00002107432,0.9980477,0.000012876455,0.000008844425,0.00005927294,0.00089085486,0.0003013242,0.000046839148,0.00009452298,0.00050575525,0.000008386512],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07178593,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1574347,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07178593,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0012622752,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009820916,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1427362},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2153327433","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2012.01263.x","title":"Does Tort Law Deter Individuals? A Behavioral Science Study","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":41,"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":"Tort; Sanctions; Variety (cybernetics); Liability; Strict liability; Joint and several liability; Tort reform; Law; Economics; Political science; Psychology; Actuarial science; Law and economics","score_opus":0.13115569724284648,"score_gpt":0.3604201102486919,"score_spread":0.22926441300584544,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2153327433","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9932777,0.00022494297,0.000116126685,0.0028233605,0.000012946994,0.000022359882,0.000032664415,0.0000012506595,0.0034886496],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99722964,0.00044060856,0.00013069787,0.0013780646,0.00003635002,0.000019558582,0.00003853222,0.0000010742929,0.00072537013],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99639076,0.0025773752,0.000096638156,0.0002695992,0.00037075373,0.0002948682],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97835004,0.014693447,0.0036642838,0.00090129295,0.0008295933,0.0015614638],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0056498405,0.00017600249,0.00042792343,0.0009697408,0.0013202797,0.0019717342,0.000366686,0.0016707821,0.003175836],"category_scores_gemma":[0.016901169,0.00024315795,0.00048725947,0.0007551371,0.0019630287,0.0021660444,0.0009016057,0.0024186014,0.00047059872],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00032659707,0.008079969,0.9283205,0.0000885225,0.00026004392,0.0002411506,0.012999116,0.0004148816,0.00046099667,0.011854758,0.0023822975,0.034571193],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000060781953,0.0019452006,0.9695236,0.00008932298,0.000090796966,0.00036999595,0.0153889265,0.0015439568,0.00016974902,0.0053560073,0.0054270527,0.000034681296],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003634783,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0047431216,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0056498405,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006973682,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00062701054,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.02987951},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2316695912","doi":"10.1111/jels.12035","title":"Empirical Analysis of Data Breach Litigation","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":170,"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":"Army Research Office; Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst; York University","keywords":"Plaintiff; Data breach; Redress; Class action; Business; Harm; Odds; Credit card; Securities fraud; Information privacy; Law; Actuarial science; Internet privacy; Payment; Finance; Political science; Supreme court","score_opus":0.17447292920618368,"score_gpt":0.43496213656724647,"score_spread":0.2604892073610628,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2316695912","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.96979034,0.0023158314,0.0024006497,0.002067482,0.000032057724,0.0003924988,0.0068059866,0.00005716553,0.016137972],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9873799,0.0010666304,0.0010209479,0.00044472172,0.00008486796,0.00031586236,0.006280805,0.000021742748,0.0033846165],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9821761,0.0052664927,0.0025083958,0.0018697451,0.006422546,0.0017566521],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.71875167,0.15183923,0.1090329,0.005312671,0.011944085,0.0031194552],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009512174,0.00048210882,0.0007083475,0.012660079,0.0030319316,0.004153947,0.0024151972,0.0028049345,0.009092324],"category_scores_gemma":[0.096282765,0.00054988,0.00068027613,0.013165809,0.0022877164,0.003531076,0.002345288,0.0034361014,0.0019519951],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00020135824,0.0014299606,0.93976855,0.00042059895,0.00022331218,0.0009937208,0.003648673,0.0028966249,0.00027074426,0.011070982,0.01321608,0.025859468],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005049139,0.0003435756,0.95191854,0.00048590172,0.00015219621,0.001429011,0.011680156,0.011271301,0.0010154163,0.00466378,0.016900042,0.0000895863],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01800409,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.015865674,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01800409,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0036731057,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0029179815,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.050305784},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2334777707","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00109.x","title":"A Quarter‐Century of Summary Judgment Practice in Six Federal District Courts","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":21,"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":"Trilogy; Summary judgment; Supreme court; Plaintiff; Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; Law; Expansive; Quarter (Canadian coin); Civil procedure; Trial court; Political science; Psychology; History","score_opus":0.05306115369832261,"score_gpt":0.3166783985502088,"score_spread":0.2636172448518862,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2334777707","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9981079,0.00029067195,0.00017250031,0.0002666468,0.0000064338005,0.0000064533415,0.00022925157,0.0000044333424,0.0009156418],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99846834,0.0001720755,0.00019113695,0.00007462194,0.000013472701,0.000009419977,0.00039757608,0.0000026485864,0.00067067647],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9955972,0.0009556154,0.00050045695,0.0008277789,0.0013913519,0.0007276053],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97478545,0.006385039,0.012729151,0.0016974158,0.0025949432,0.0018079982],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003615041,0.000096729724,0.0002489962,0.0034070604,0.0019714688,0.0017957567,0.00065064477,0.00093506195,0.0012906257],"category_scores_gemma":[0.014824927,0.0003618923,0.00037598627,0.0046960227,0.0014822974,0.0015279504,0.0014396359,0.0010983209,0.00024424843],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00026581637,0.00017522286,0.940769,0.000055215198,0.00006404671,0.000438555,0.012005086,0.00053763564,0.0023678923,0.0017822308,0.0014187125,0.0401206],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000003454806,0.00008630946,0.9946219,0.000016487866,0.000009758673,0.00011247379,0.002246283,0.00017260075,0.00042074727,0.00012226602,0.002172694,0.000015146648],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02821141,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.08068941,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02821141,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0034599989,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016615828,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.056094408},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2590918633","doi":"10.1111/jels.12140","title":"Unintended Consequences: The Regressive Effects of Increased Access to Courts","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Plaintiff; Unintended consequences; Legislature; Damages; Law; Business; Trial court; Economics; Political science; Supreme court","score_opus":0.12183951220767718,"score_gpt":0.35964508921304755,"score_spread":0.23780557700537036,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2590918633","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9355106,0.0019036977,0.005018159,0.009277797,0.00010554682,0.00011887676,0.0018541813,0.00011566883,0.046095602],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9953667,0.00028018883,0.00042815958,0.00049255753,0.00004632682,0.00002051056,0.00010560696,0.0000138911155,0.003246211],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9946714,0.001653344,0.00045812508,0.00097196334,0.0011721537,0.0010730132],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.93595487,0.026922643,0.02426808,0.007541867,0.003168407,0.0021440475],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003827684,0.00030071725,0.0005939772,0.00095435657,0.0014866762,0.0022438446,0.0013776926,0.0012468351,0.017944172],"category_scores_gemma":[0.042560562,0.00040156083,0.0010155273,0.0010508753,0.003444547,0.0023560456,0.002588884,0.0027389275,0.0006718686],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0005048072,0.00069813,0.8999875,0.00021146527,0.00059531385,0.0016667728,0.0019315652,0.009808114,0.0019310615,0.031648334,0.00541443,0.045602445],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000060954437,0.0003162436,0.96185976,0.00012763744,0.00024759685,0.00035565076,0.0014594812,0.0049121007,0.0018350078,0.020957537,0.0078094006,0.000058702382],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07285901,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.12818573,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07285901,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0031607507,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0023255167,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14486986},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2767571406","doi":"10.1111/jels.12161","title":"Triaging the Law: Developing the Common Law on the Supreme Court of India","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Law; Jurisdiction; Political science; Precedent; Original jurisdiction; Majority opinion; Supreme Court Decisions; Law of the case; Court of equity; Common law; Salience (neuroscience); Concurring opinion; Court of record; Citation; Psychology","score_opus":0.18992218102264155,"score_gpt":0.42942458305424364,"score_spread":0.23950240203160209,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2767571406","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":[0.45236441,0.004992972,0.013922881,0.0374859,0.00041326886,0.0002856791,0.00023881973,0.00012927345,0.4901668],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98318774,0.0015925991,0.0047425968,0.0011422297,0.00013204596,0.000059174967,0.000110492365,0.000040165723,0.00899293],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9909758,0.004140627,0.00039156462,0.00081735145,0.0019607327,0.001713904],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9750104,0.015625961,0.0022236146,0.0021583608,0.0035976535,0.0013840579],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010105906,0.0002762548,0.00035506894,0.0068024625,0.008646671,0.013774626,0.0026380948,0.0017803167,0.005050046],"category_scores_gemma":[0.028740847,0.0005458546,0.0005570732,0.0066862702,0.013351015,0.008489685,0.008506041,0.0044868933,0.0007761558],"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":[0.0000147955825,0.00005228837,0.0077677127,0.00005175653,0.000010935222,0.00070270867,0.036402266,0.0008013629,0.00021632599,0.9169059,0.0060079126,0.031066058],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000033805674,0.00015515968,0.088715814,0.0014905425,0.00014966911,0.0008592316,0.12141341,0.008886137,0.0024116377,0.35210246,0.4235163,0.00026573834],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07995362,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.16018213,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07995362,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.018908402,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.022943342,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.15897644},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2886473766","doi":"10.1111/jels.12186","title":"A Rose by Any Other Name: Understanding Judicial Decisions that Do Not Cite Precedent","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"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":"CITES; Supreme court; Law; Political science; Judicial opinion; Foundation (evidence); Phenomenon; Philosophy","score_opus":0.2462212841917908,"score_gpt":0.43611650463903234,"score_spread":0.18989522044724155,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2886473766","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"evaluation","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":"evaluation","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.5596365,0.0060296482,0.043972608,0.042963464,0.00037460722,0.00010149605,0.0005468332,0.000094584524,0.34628025],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98923373,0.0010673335,0.0041211387,0.0010104467,0.000119634264,0.000026283822,0.00018158196,0.000034868655,0.004204992],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9941233,0.0031822422,0.00027092535,0.001043037,0.0009482113,0.0004323604],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9471365,0.03779637,0.007630877,0.003307614,0.0031949624,0.00093368517],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","bibliometrics"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009940241,0.00021014601,0.00053428556,0.0025183104,0.0034411883,0.008746484,0.0012647465,0.0023293365,0.0051102177],"category_scores_gemma":[0.059626643,0.00027677364,0.00042474773,0.003473766,0.007834051,0.015646175,0.0023098213,0.0029927052,0.0008141168],"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":[0.000058016296,0.000092523136,0.029424766,0.00013235127,0.000035380464,0.00041055502,0.029427553,0.0017404514,0.00034763064,0.88241345,0.0039164512,0.052000847],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002293512,0.00007363439,0.056484222,0.00065846916,0.00007099662,0.0003537692,0.022327738,0.013435366,0.0006519526,0.8142522,0.0915876,0.00008096964],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.015105184,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.021766145,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9974817,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0044634,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0036550767,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.052569628},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2894910955","doi":"10.1111/jels.12227","title":"Entrepreneurs’ Legal Status Choices and the C Corporation Survival Penalty","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Corporate Finance and Governance","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":1,"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":"Corporation; Corporate governance; Business; Limited liability; Supreme court; Limited partnership; Finance; Actuarial science; Economics; Accounting; Law; General partnership; Political science","score_opus":0.04339464939446907,"score_gpt":0.2933446869079912,"score_spread":0.24995003751352213,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2894910955","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99684274,0.0001299052,0.00025676994,0.00054250547,0.000011155545,0.0000078502835,0.0003841056,0.0000067621286,0.0018182546],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989417,0.00004993276,0.000049001403,0.00003580806,0.00001168843,0.000003625613,0.00037436592,0.0000015584944,0.00053235464],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9978314,0.0006915451,0.00022001678,0.00027072898,0.00045576753,0.0005304334],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9525204,0.017111715,0.0222417,0.0017958756,0.001465862,0.0048645516],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003444521,0.00013933096,0.00034171305,0.0012920382,0.00097189314,0.0014368307,0.0004934535,0.00063172705,0.005460145],"category_scores_gemma":[0.024162538,0.00014146596,0.0003992856,0.001134067,0.0012359087,0.0011175121,0.0017100379,0.0018747644,0.00056201173],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001110435,0.00008368775,0.99077636,0.0000059137715,0.000020512969,0.00017276197,0.00019611439,0.000469371,0.00004803552,0.0011351102,0.0012596161,0.0057214126],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000023255656,0.00014910208,0.9889025,0.00003068096,0.000033223416,0.0004864513,0.0015902151,0.0036878455,0.00023876507,0.0027971307,0.0020401103,0.000020787531],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0060819015,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007372303,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0060819015,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00051227084,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00060404866,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.018266022},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2896956484","doi":"10.1111/jels.12207","title":"Lawyers at the Peak of Their Careers: A 30‐Year Longitudinal Study of Job and Life Satisfaction","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Healthcare Policy and Management","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":17,"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":"Job satisfaction; Quarter (Canadian coin); Psychology; Life satisfaction; Longitudinal study; Demographic economics; Demography; Social psychology; Medicine; Sociology; Economics; Geography","score_opus":0.15335977859018254,"score_gpt":0.35387608137072274,"score_spread":0.2005163027805402,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2896956484","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9988642,0.00012314954,0.00006647032,0.00028345647,0.000010545956,0.00001139418,0.00030188606,0.0000019851486,0.00033681904],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9982797,0.0001717571,0.00011106395,0.0002410225,0.00001684701,0.00002476851,0.00052883476,0.0000035553478,0.0006224312],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9993118,0.00019377888,0.000040605442,0.000089179994,0.00014705861,0.00021763472],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9976286,0.0001762721,0.0005571238,0.00013505637,0.00039539693,0.0011075092],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0020438528,0.00016313366,0.0003359637,0.0008625577,0.0017467096,0.0013839983,0.00044506625,0.0010344732,0.0011382152],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002785406,0.0004088166,0.0004973481,0.0011442254,0.000359903,0.0014856813,0.00104339,0.0023014017,0.0006363798],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000039102146,0.00038932287,0.9938174,0.0000051994834,0.000027111162,0.00008011068,0.0022797764,0.000019234249,0.00019554803,0.00004814176,0.0005396781,0.0025594195],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000003766006,0.00014468603,0.9954745,0.000012618915,0.000009450716,0.00008178152,0.0034294869,0.000076294076,0.000036025198,0.000033469863,0.00068977545,0.000008163881],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.025124103,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04502737,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.025124103,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000489188,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010759998,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.049955726},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2910887493","doi":"10.1111/jels.12208","title":"Damage Caps and Defensive Medicine: Reexamination with Patient‐Level Data","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Kellogg's (Canada)","funders":"National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute","keywords":"Defensive medicine; Medicine; Malpractice; Medical malpractice; Psychological intervention; Medicare Part B; Tort reform; Health care; Liability; Emergency medicine; Finance; Economics; Tort; Nursing","score_opus":0.32886428631838477,"score_gpt":0.5338800208500991,"score_spread":0.20501573453171434,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2910887493","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8232443,0.014190448,0.04210538,0.06488374,0.0010097887,0.0008142636,0.027974807,0.0004457114,0.025331594],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9800939,0.0011027528,0.006508553,0.0043056053,0.0005881707,0.00019036194,0.004618753,0.00009294929,0.002499015],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9508279,0.03273752,0.0037846502,0.004061308,0.0069824257,0.0016061417],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.3886631,0.5079431,0.062453113,0.02807204,0.010731146,0.0021374596],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.06379889,0.0009679833,0.002239736,0.0038123294,0.0012304819,0.0049483497,0.0034259064,0.0026515194,0.010146836],"category_scores_gemma":[0.24160165,0.00062176544,0.0037849413,0.00861284,0.0030475915,0.0052309553,0.0035477406,0.006358965,0.0010566693],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008406278,0.00039903418,0.8850265,0.0010613082,0.0056527955,0.0011115426,0.0024725222,0.012459751,0.00035780366,0.02562526,0.023908962,0.04108399],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003001008,0.0010636991,0.86306816,0.0012644998,0.0037891807,0.0005620838,0.004196869,0.038141098,0.0013701109,0.025328666,0.06071449,0.00020098285],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03674425,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.029739628,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06379889,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0026307066,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0032911366,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3374048},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3020830203","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2008.00144.x","title":"To Lawyer or Not to Lawyer: <i>Is</i> that the Question?","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Legal Education and Practice Innovations","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":57,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Presumption; Legal service; Economic Justice; Legal profession; Political science; Business; Law","score_opus":0.3002855949768109,"score_gpt":0.5415371594144396,"score_spread":0.24125156443762868,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3020830203","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":[0.23505872,0.013523298,0.0019567967,0.6927082,0.0012675249,0.000038517155,0.00026680043,0.0000132912455,0.05516685],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94405985,0.0054305433,0.00054796116,0.045722593,0.0008215617,0.000028271596,0.00007347732,0.000014211554,0.0033014396],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9935288,0.003454129,0.00032547233,0.00057445007,0.0009665464,0.0011505624],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97210646,0.016320031,0.006632544,0.00047066956,0.0025896481,0.0018806935],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009569224,0.00012884177,0.00049495883,0.00083080435,0.003008688,0.0071569923,0.0011498536,0.004535714,0.0069415565],"category_scores_gemma":[0.051309146,0.00019114131,0.00028099056,0.0014538171,0.01146817,0.010533608,0.002328139,0.00501984,0.0010544754],"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":[0.0003059204,0.0005042322,0.28011048,0.00088133896,0.00019244339,0.0012290333,0.097231984,0.00032061068,0.0004727193,0.31522545,0.14034249,0.16318344],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006613907,0.00020911156,0.14970379,0.0034735678,0.00015690578,0.001932538,0.5124322,0.0010005849,0.00078773097,0.14586207,0.18422602,0.00014928926],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.016531013,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01918618,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.016531013,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0039875675,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0044496064,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.050607502},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121178051","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01247.x","title":"The Value of Capital Market Regulation: IPOs Versus Reverse Mergers","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Corporate Finance and Governance","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":0,"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; Center for Interuniversity Research and Analysis on Organizations; Université Laval","funders":"","keywords":"Initial public offering; Context (archaeology); Humanities; Capital market; Political science; Economics; Welfare economics; Accounting; Finance","score_opus":0.07164956170675067,"score_gpt":0.31825691782839516,"score_spread":0.24660735612164447,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3121178051","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.97950053,0.0011842266,0.0019499633,0.0022199699,0.00002220063,0.000022927514,0.00011407483,0.000011074003,0.014975033],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9993056,0.00018600635,0.00009926281,0.00006400698,0.000046606856,0.00000315234,0.000021379257,0.0000023221187,0.0002716606],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9981833,0.0007527862,0.000086902975,0.00020365615,0.00033068194,0.00044273224],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9087515,0.0525923,0.031470224,0.0027900443,0.0023190845,0.0020768393],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00378189,0.0002588935,0.00055247283,0.0010546322,0.00075228536,0.0043844865,0.0009220721,0.0017918838,0.0029263701],"category_scores_gemma":[0.026148284,0.00017845718,0.00053538237,0.0012307807,0.0035949943,0.0031046176,0.0014885772,0.0023995554,0.00019841487],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0029789377,0.0017263391,0.49725616,0.00042387197,0.0005537406,0.0026400234,0.0017560251,0.10287248,0.013762768,0.29345334,0.004033509,0.078542866],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00037129817,0.0020556075,0.55666804,0.00028062362,0.001086157,0.001471101,0.0048395456,0.1948375,0.016238797,0.2147037,0.007189683,0.00025792158],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002310029,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019501388,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0043844865,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0021830176,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009825643,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.020000756},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121915089","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2010.01204.x","title":"An Empirical Examination of the Governance Choices of Income Trusts","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","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":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Corporate governance; Business; Accounting; Jurisdiction; Finance; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.13504073181063656,"score_gpt":0.4267307255811078,"score_spread":0.2916899937704712,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3121915089","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99824536,0.000035664172,0.0000678277,0.000088935,0.0000010505208,0.000008355869,0.0002219061,9.892647e-7,0.0013298377],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9992229,0.000027336382,0.00002899491,0.000007961329,0.0000014390288,0.0000034528505,0.0001847029,8.8686176e-7,0.00052229944],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99767274,0.00037590828,0.00013972749,0.0002410437,0.0007267008,0.00084389746],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97727376,0.0033748462,0.013470842,0.0009430113,0.002377553,0.002560049],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013694539,0.00010856068,0.00023487431,0.0013737797,0.0014577231,0.0017392981,0.00047691076,0.00028972767,0.0030173627],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009429936,0.00016027938,0.00018968286,0.0026205634,0.0017417513,0.0011205971,0.001234615,0.0006044388,0.00023694793],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000028645936,0.000027926424,0.99246395,0.0000076702,0.00001518678,0.00011391073,0.0034654746,0.00014311528,0.00010211652,0.0008777071,0.00035089054,0.0024033275],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000031674604,0.000021758085,0.9857555,0.000013775127,0.000007717307,0.000056916746,0.012043296,0.00045954174,0.00009588022,0.00013199408,0.0014030123,0.0000074498853],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.45996824,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.65254205,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.45996824,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0070525436,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0035439427,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.91458184},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3122772384","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2004.00005.x","title":"Empirical Estimates of Filtering Failure in Court‐Supervised Reorganization","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Corporate Insolvency and Governance","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":40,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Plan (archaeology); Sample (material); Empirical research; Type I and type II errors; Actuarial science; Estimation; Econometrics; Business; Computer science; Economics; Operations management; Statistics; Mathematics; Management; History","score_opus":0.061776660756633225,"score_gpt":0.31428681770066447,"score_spread":0.2525101569440312,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3122772384","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9969056,0.00012751283,0.0012120687,0.000091258116,0.0000029500845,0.00003177634,0.00058204297,0.000018756698,0.0010279584],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.998558,0.000054236414,0.00024383739,0.000013403946,0.000006438556,0.000014125251,0.00076918234,0.0000033970732,0.00033743167],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9941446,0.0018798513,0.0007697025,0.0007055142,0.0014928437,0.0010074072],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.746135,0.11744873,0.11441141,0.00941578,0.008403096,0.0041858866],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0079709375,0.0003179271,0.0005380423,0.004093307,0.00079307775,0.0012710249,0.000946497,0.0009823013,0.003350086],"category_scores_gemma":[0.084347025,0.0004115465,0.0005886688,0.0032600146,0.001573369,0.0011399313,0.0011148634,0.0014795765,0.000348753],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000046758483,0.000046037778,0.99333185,0.000006859101,0.000056439807,0.000070343915,0.00024157637,0.0022580402,0.000052450785,0.00020272701,0.0002605898,0.0034263143],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000043708947,0.00005003813,0.9951054,0.00001450164,0.000021896467,0.00016369844,0.0003285703,0.0036427113,0.0001164236,0.00030611758,0.00023372611,0.000012576783],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.05905102,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.064029716,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05905102,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0018530118,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0013392122,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.11741459},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3122982036","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2012.01251.x","title":"Will Tort Reform Bend the Cost Curve? Evidence from Texas","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":54,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Kellogg's (Canada)","funders":"","keywords":"Tort reform; Tort; Economics; Public economics; Actuarial science; Accounting; Liability","score_opus":0.3294400808438403,"score_gpt":0.5554552672090723,"score_spread":0.22601518636523205,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3122982036","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8177314,0.017888699,0.0007532909,0.08461222,0.00030868623,0.00011649247,0.0036004048,0.000030366278,0.0749584],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9767671,0.008090191,0.0002535595,0.009478014,0.00038171723,0.000032457192,0.0012704883,0.000018153696,0.003708199],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99661833,0.0011657627,0.00020462074,0.00038679378,0.0008634513,0.0007611303],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.93288475,0.030087776,0.02525886,0.0020357184,0.007459184,0.0022736192],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0049467133,0.00036121692,0.00043985868,0.0019848647,0.0014830232,0.0030325786,0.0013200142,0.0020918625,0.018447427],"category_scores_gemma":[0.030684665,0.00032076277,0.00093083474,0.003097187,0.0026324615,0.0027462295,0.0018263836,0.0025556474,0.001185146],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0038701673,0.0014367879,0.72428757,0.0020416612,0.0014147589,0.0008361403,0.0047656153,0.0046927626,0.0005512989,0.06825065,0.088454254,0.09939838],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005575984,0.00084714463,0.90451044,0.0025571517,0.0012734259,0.00027913507,0.010344432,0.0016945658,0.00088016933,0.01072187,0.066242166,0.00009197834],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.050210457,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.061974414,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.050210457,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006557754,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004715148,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09983635},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3123791578","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01209.x","title":"The Paradox of “Fraud‐on‐the‐Market Theory”: Who Relies on the Efficiency of Market Prices?","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"The King's University","funders":"","keywords":"Class action; Endogeneity; Damages; Market efficiency; Economics; Profit (economics); Efficient-market hypothesis; Microeconomics; Financial economics; Stock market; Econometrics; Law","score_opus":0.09351026016447354,"score_gpt":0.2795344347899108,"score_spread":0.18602417462543724,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3123791578","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.3628388,0.00606507,0.17328778,0.21660319,0.0006259953,0.00034649135,0.00045936194,0.00030059382,0.23947267],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9831039,0.00082818914,0.005075248,0.008124727,0.00057392544,0.00006542908,0.00005673301,0.000057918493,0.0021139134],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9693605,0.013814385,0.001766601,0.0040218793,0.008652789,0.002383812],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.7867165,0.14306584,0.026578534,0.028968796,0.012471776,0.0021985208],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.05710172,0.000564321,0.0019027829,0.0038990409,0.0021418822,0.012021065,0.0034627293,0.006381378,0.0077356407],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1721156,0.0006596089,0.001524199,0.002266291,0.030221293,0.02380345,0.004254387,0.008185076,0.0011253672],"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":[0.000072666946,0.00010788651,0.009931202,0.000089291825,0.00011072644,0.00015359523,0.0007817994,0.0021971527,0.00011770997,0.9534455,0.006273759,0.0267188],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009324628,0.00007326862,0.0069251885,0.00012828373,0.00004999641,0.00021712895,0.0006548288,0.008404336,0.00091746374,0.9732397,0.009248659,0.000047951216],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002215737,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0014690371,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05710172,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0044955877,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0049700136,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.30198634},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3163252776","doi":"10.1111/j.1740-1461.2011.01244.x","title":"The Price Effects of Event‐Risk Protection: The Results from a Natural Experiment","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Credit Risk and Financial Regulations","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","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":"Issuer; Comparability; Bond; Event study; Event (particle physics); Business; Actuarial science; Economics; Natural experiment; Bond valuation; Econometrics; Financial economics; Finance","score_opus":0.08069201403991479,"score_gpt":0.3007496494646755,"score_spread":0.2200576354247607,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3163252776","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.95909077,0.00022786579,0.012936763,0.0021482315,0.00050861895,0.0024970316,0.00087646116,0.00012716722,0.021587027],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9719089,0.00023607779,0.013383178,0.0021027562,0.00028818767,0.0042637032,0.00043090017,0.00006331102,0.0073230956],"study_design_codex":"nonrandomized_trial","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99127483,0.0050599333,0.0006386094,0.0010946997,0.0015652296,0.0003667057],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.83935356,0.12887298,0.014350205,0.012885062,0.0026446802,0.0018934946],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014742757,0.0006824034,0.0011613601,0.0004134895,0.00090888445,0.0022950878,0.0016583367,0.002861557,0.015480528],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07226381,0.00044716793,0.00092383387,0.00038057668,0.0028123027,0.003281086,0.001460774,0.0038955738,0.0016423349],"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":[0.176974,0.2510176,0.057067584,0.004428286,0.0020403028,0.0021640502,0.007898324,0.021019522,0.11353207,0.18274966,0.021638727,0.15946995],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.057468653,0.20861298,0.15330459,0.00043065456,0.0022664184,0.0016570499,0.002726337,0.079073325,0.05907604,0.37960112,0.05505704,0.0007258403],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006777388,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005058328,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.015480528,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0007672883,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009684607,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07796812},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3208587775","doi":"10.1111/jels.12303","title":"The Canada Trademarks Dataset","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Intellectual Property Law","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":"Business","score_opus":0.12764257701088985,"score_gpt":0.4145328229771462,"score_spread":0.28689024596625634,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3208587775","genre_codex":"dataset","genre_gemma":"dataset","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"dataset","genre_consensus":"dataset","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0020166622,0.00021578607,0.00014295583,0.00021284135,0.000021425154,0.000039230203,0.9934301,0.00018869164,0.0037322913],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0045651807,0.00019867255,0.00081664044,0.000101742175,0.000012579409,0.00009411093,0.9913326,0.000043618733,0.0028348747],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99806803,0.00013514975,0.00013368903,0.0003487142,0.0009185154,0.00039586236],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99379706,0.00059135864,0.00044160977,0.000726633,0.003908668,0.0005346527],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00089036336,0.0008073439,0.00080373767,0.009089757,0.0029451936,0.0029882041,0.0027045116,0.0012279436,0.0186169],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0076980363,0.0003633283,0.0006886444,0.021814007,0.00066847645,0.0009800078,0.0013651366,0.0015648252,0.016818266],"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":[0.000059915157,0.000036075013,0.00832646,0.00017677719,0.000037472746,0.00009865404,0.00010000712,0.0004559289,0.0001297629,0.0029337718,0.9792722,0.008372867],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000057847374,0.000008376205,0.019244168,0.00013326705,0.000027742135,0.00008490761,0.00032865646,0.0009986912,0.00033423118,0.0008140763,0.97792596,0.00004203985],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9214166,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.95885366,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07858342,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01698628,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.032667,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.15809238},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3210919575","doi":"10.1111/jels.12336","title":"Stay at home if you can: <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 stay‐at‐home guidelines and local crime","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Crime Patterns and Interventions","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"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 Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Government (linguistics); Demographic economics; Exploit; Pandemic; Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); Latin Americans; Work (physics); Business; Geography; Political science; Economics; Medicine; Computer security","score_opus":0.18317267320142022,"score_gpt":0.4493406635364326,"score_spread":0.26616799033501237,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3210919575","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9894187,0.00014806782,0.00014247515,0.0022070103,0.000023982826,0.000022925418,0.0008484072,0.000018096694,0.0071704276],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9976699,0.00008977627,0.0001399578,0.00013849237,0.000014581643,0.000023432318,0.00035430506,0.000006391125,0.001563174],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9993932,0.00023022863,0.000043403186,0.00005055605,0.00010970304,0.00017294545],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99538076,0.00048302105,0.0018336568,0.00025642954,0.0007502475,0.0012959283],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00067634607,0.00008805604,0.00021334902,0.0004275228,0.0010262184,0.0011845941,0.00061243965,0.00036169039,0.0091021],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004551099,0.00009653428,0.00021874996,0.00051813235,0.0007350564,0.0004957091,0.0014614238,0.0006485528,0.0006712919],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006226067,0.0004932929,0.96269315,0.00006250464,0.000045508667,0.00014454684,0.0025941376,0.00034825885,0.00026172027,0.00079414336,0.010591364,0.02190891],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000004713948,0.000078581994,0.9868346,0.000058095604,0.000010335974,0.000029815608,0.008048782,0.00019859878,0.00011674552,0.00009245129,0.004518833,0.000008592653],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1664064,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.30286896,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1664064,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0016861815,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0019188346,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.33087558},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4308441130","doi":"10.1111/jels.12338","title":"Should patients use online reviews to pick their doctors and hospitals?","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Kellogg's (Canada)","funders":"","keywords":"Sanctions; Malpractice; Discipline; Control (management); Medical record; Family medicine; Uncorrelated; Medicine; Medical malpractice; Service (business); Psychology; Actuarial science; Business; Medical emergency; Medical education; Political science; Law; Economics; Surgery; Management; Marketing","score_opus":0.3887285531217053,"score_gpt":0.5413272086344832,"score_spread":0.15259865551277796,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4308441130","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9867378,0.0007101374,0.0007206058,0.003371596,0.0000736493,0.00007063647,0.0006528571,0.000054538683,0.0076082875],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99750924,0.00019035951,0.00074738514,0.0006877877,0.00006261623,0.00002306158,0.00019337234,0.0000062991685,0.00057984324],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9966059,0.0021149798,0.0003120739,0.00018557602,0.00060515973,0.00017631822],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9592573,0.018924942,0.014702635,0.0013467028,0.003244384,0.0025240157],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00296294,0.00015299677,0.00031419436,0.0006564848,0.00044093738,0.0018784084,0.00026268524,0.0005185545,0.0063547967],"category_scores_gemma":[0.044625726,0.00013335349,0.00028580663,0.0008200852,0.00028798444,0.0011515531,0.0005795501,0.00053372385,0.0012210326],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00045504543,0.0003334665,0.9259123,0.00010010103,0.00008212888,0.000081169346,0.0010921649,0.00013901656,0.00024625615,0.00017174981,0.006019406,0.065367155],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009351819,0.0007976581,0.9807225,0.00011657389,0.000093627226,0.00050475,0.0071242144,0.0019295478,0.0006496069,0.0005523154,0.0073770303,0.000038665974],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0016329624,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0029008451,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0063547967,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00036177522,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00050850515,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.02125895},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4309258126","doi":"10.1111/jels.12333","title":"Examining the effects of antidiscrimination laws on children in the foster care and adoption systems","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy","field":"Psychology","cited_by":6,"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":"Universität Zürich; University of Virginia; Tel Aviv University; University of Toronto; Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich; Hebrew University of Jerusalem","keywords":"Welfare; Foster care; Politics; Welfare state; Causal inference; State (computer science); Political science; Law; Public economics; Economics","score_opus":0.09411984896468889,"score_gpt":0.413301780346135,"score_spread":0.3191819313814461,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4309258126","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.99347794,0.00036752844,0.00033335196,0.0010135279,0.0000094557545,0.000028831315,0.0003846359,0.0000045142615,0.0043801577],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9990061,0.00014845803,0.00013990943,0.00008580366,0.0000087545095,0.000016284604,0.00015650518,0.0000016613957,0.0004364527],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9933896,0.0031646914,0.00027729667,0.00052124046,0.0008718503,0.0017752716],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96561897,0.014751258,0.014780936,0.0009086201,0.001834658,0.0021056444],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005810391,0.0002278047,0.00033206312,0.0015082461,0.0013622158,0.0027170212,0.0011397353,0.0008087087,0.005119467],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02199142,0.00025255198,0.0006539704,0.0021087585,0.0020715254,0.0019438594,0.0034684532,0.0019982508,0.0002296111],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009961789,0.0001943396,0.9811848,0.00003340166,0.00023138606,0.00013609984,0.0014212807,0.0023040916,0.00014605699,0.0060387203,0.0006482764,0.0075620194],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026924023,0.00024283094,0.98391634,0.00006665381,0.00015503846,0.0000815318,0.007938635,0.0027317558,0.0004206516,0.0017956096,0.0026038757,0.000020031548],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.077244245,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.104293786,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.077244245,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0050453856,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0029740497,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.15358931},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4394757774","doi":"10.1111/jels.12380","title":"Rankings without U.S. News: A revealed preference approach to evaluating law schools","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"University of Toronto; Andrew W. Mellon Foundation","keywords":"Preference; Ranking (information retrieval); CLARITY; Legal education; Scope (computer science); Psychology; Mathematics education; Political science; Law; Sociology; Computer science; Statistics; Mathematics","score_opus":0.258648525459174,"score_gpt":0.4668240924227282,"score_spread":0.20817556696355421,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4394757774","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"evaluation","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":"evaluation","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7194782,0.0009033666,0.24607898,0.0030355342,0.00012653499,0.0008510674,0.0044529852,0.00023937359,0.024833946],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97364444,0.0001349844,0.024159864,0.000112399706,0.00005766319,0.00017496054,0.0006053921,0.000015762977,0.0010943626],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9591611,0.033057943,0.0012551111,0.0023427594,0.0028029212,0.0013800929],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9235396,0.058424227,0.008359444,0.0033853054,0.004303767,0.0019875995],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01523913,0.00097272696,0.0018836581,0.008053389,0.0017096805,0.007606196,0.0019384965,0.00163443,0.0050259903],"category_scores_gemma":[0.060072247,0.0007442421,0.0016296322,0.009897386,0.0025856614,0.004997502,0.0019294389,0.0026189513,0.00059411203],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0024224499,0.0016100487,0.31826174,0.00075791683,0.0022128122,0.0014783228,0.0038933167,0.25989747,0.0014059287,0.27271277,0.0115130115,0.12383432],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014242245,0.0010989271,0.042335913,0.00010592612,0.00030991182,0.0001954715,0.0050363126,0.7995206,0.00082720263,0.14590219,0.004242435,0.00028269464],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.022984976,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.029123697,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9847609,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006144501,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0027671417,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08059323},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4405649322","doi":"10.1111/jels.12404","title":"Patents Used in Patent Office Rejections as Indicators of Value","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Intellectual Property and Patents","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Trademark; European patent office; Novelty; Patent office; Value (mathematics); Metric (unit); Assertion; Business; Patent troll; Quarter (Canadian coin); Subject (documents); Patent application; Intellectual property; Computer science; Marketing; Political science; Law; Patent law; Psychology; Commerce; Library science; History","score_opus":0.2554220099689555,"score_gpt":0.3405438970153245,"score_spread":0.08512188704636903,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4405649322","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"evaluation","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":"evaluation","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9878946,0.0010714957,0.0022284263,0.0003070248,0.000036547946,0.000042759126,0.0011386432,0.00003372791,0.0072468985],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9982204,0.0001701531,0.0003330537,0.00002381698,0.00009640864,0.000016722423,0.00065823254,0.0000062046392,0.00047504215],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9891059,0.0019998872,0.0017527879,0.00096186704,0.0056656795,0.0005139283],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.58978355,0.18272619,0.19620073,0.009473089,0.01720201,0.0046143346],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch","bibliometrics"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009007029,0.0003371506,0.00086415646,0.0101878755,0.00056340033,0.0037683465,0.0012038208,0.0013640813,0.0030442628],"category_scores_gemma":[0.11478672,0.00014537673,0.0006128271,0.00904304,0.0014427217,0.0031057245,0.0018111055,0.0017303244,0.00073778845],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00024397438,0.00024620935,0.97219735,0.00016494599,0.00023816232,0.00016882537,0.00059087377,0.0017620166,0.0011072033,0.0028759534,0.00080718164,0.0195972],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000021511032,0.0003576365,0.98301584,0.000084991334,0.00012348665,0.00049221795,0.00097374764,0.0055357446,0.0022377833,0.003805783,0.0032940563,0.000057094338],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001486999,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011021055,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.99099296,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0010476984,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00062143133,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.047634244},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4409716856","doi":"10.1111/jels.12413","title":"Hallucination‐Free? Assessing the Reliability of Leading <scp>AI</scp> Legal Research Tools","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Artificial Intelligence in Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":92,"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":"Stanford Law School; University of Toronto; Fordham University","keywords":"Hallucinating; Automatic summarization; Legal psychology; Typology; Lexis; Computer science; Legal case; Legal research; Psychology; Data science; Artificial intelligence; Social psychology; Law; Political science; Sociology; Linguistics","score_opus":0.32529834317271256,"score_gpt":0.5757539876260013,"score_spread":0.2504556444532887,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4409716856","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"evaluation","model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":"evaluation","domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9670214,0.0008045329,0.0137829445,0.0015930292,0.00009264274,0.0005635216,0.0006428939,0.0021233736,0.013375625],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9902462,0.00012957385,0.007894843,0.00020952414,0.000043165033,0.00012768524,0.0005404877,0.00012055999,0.00068785617],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.8916167,0.05578578,0.011272137,0.008499637,0.030773597,0.0020521206],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.27971274,0.5692166,0.061366115,0.045788527,0.038524173,0.0053918427],"candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.08605786,0.0006704377,0.0009030268,0.006744006,0.0015846827,0.007902852,0.00309882,0.0026314624,0.0024252324],"category_scores_gemma":[0.53018004,0.0006317749,0.00061436155,0.0035969263,0.0037129826,0.007832309,0.0070949066,0.0020744463,0.0016633335],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0033791007,0.0016523041,0.47954172,0.0031205264,0.0010647323,0.0007612717,0.04870131,0.016463729,0.009944828,0.0056437114,0.011609134,0.41811773],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00056956394,0.007892582,0.60495234,0.0020703664,0.001337861,0.0025353455,0.039337028,0.23623763,0.046947584,0.020113362,0.037039675,0.0009666422],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004348563,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0031824051,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.91394216,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0021477267,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0019487388,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4551229},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4411214515","doi":"10.1111/jels.12419","title":"In the Eye of the Beholder: How Lawyers Perceive Legal Ethical Problems","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":1,"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":"Fiduciary; Professional conduct; Harm; Legal ethics; Professional responsibility; Scholarship; Perception; Political science; Legal profession; Affect (linguistics); Politics; Law; Interdependence; Public relations; Social psychology; Psychology; Duty","score_opus":0.07652903511287192,"score_gpt":0.31965008511180304,"score_spread":0.24312104999893114,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4411214515","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9754121,0.0006006774,0.0008930815,0.009435066,0.000035295354,0.000041360665,0.0000146376315,0.000012164338,0.0135556655],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9964959,0.0003153966,0.00034670343,0.0017622069,0.000011912322,0.000011477578,0.000009587076,0.0000081004055,0.0010388151],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9921846,0.0046014376,0.00017174073,0.00045644311,0.0015300416,0.0010557582],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9819094,0.009499965,0.0033124352,0.000522772,0.0021267054,0.0026286517],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008923163,0.00024987757,0.00037254303,0.0018941091,0.00762249,0.0109994635,0.001094375,0.003815797,0.0045761294],"category_scores_gemma":[0.032878604,0.00054275215,0.00036837746,0.0007612794,0.012997947,0.00478233,0.0038047454,0.0043380465,0.000480783],"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":[0.00008170603,0.00024218786,0.08082339,0.00008074234,0.000030693805,0.0006113214,0.8938174,0.00011716847,0.0020395296,0.0043921154,0.0031705003,0.014593185],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000028305003,0.00008611607,0.04105479,0.00015382406,0.000024693476,0.00023795124,0.9388607,0.0005214892,0.00022026338,0.004713678,0.014050646,0.000047486345],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.10302798,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.16181257,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.10302798,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008882321,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006088734,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.20485657},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}