{"meta":{"query_hash":"ebf19a7e050d","filters":{"venue":"Journal of academic language and learning"},"cohort_total":3,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":3,"exported":3,"export_cap":100000,"truncated":false,"label_status":"direct model label, unvalidated","prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated (Codex and Gemma teacher distillation)","score_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","snapshot":{"source":"OpenAlex, pinned release, all 482 partitions","release":"2026-06-24","frame_built":"2026-07-12"},"permalink":"https://metacan.xera.ac/q/ebf19a7e050d","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Journal+of+academic+language+and+learning"},"results":[{"id":"W2109640497","doi":"","title":"Rhetorical genre theory and academic literacy","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of academic language and learning","topic":"Discourse Analysis in Language Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":50,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Rhetorical question; Interpretation (philosophy); Literacy; Perspective (graphical); Action (physics); Repetition (rhetorical device); Sociology; Element (criminal law); Discourse community; Linguistics; Rhetorical modes; Epistemology; Computer science; Philosophy; Political science","score_opus":0.0165706978116509,"score_gpt":0.3083419952953892,"score_spread":0.2917712974837383,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2109640497","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.95563567,0.033409186,0.00032677772,0.0004957372,0.00019778038,0.000032024247,0.0000010538537,0.000022435446,0.009879356],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.988455,0.0018333404,0.00011044133,0.0005780811,0.0027465895,9.0193544e-7,0.0000011911387,0.000017124064,0.0062573478],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986307,0.00038875308,0.00040869555,0.00013534851,0.00023259313,0.0002039091],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988373,0.0005377031,0.00036443872,0.000067375506,0.000089254165,0.00010392846],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021130044,0.00014289825,0.00033003572,0.00016966398,0.00029377764,0.00009196602,0.00014888712,0.0001001912,0.0003659932],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010919067,0.00009735549,0.0000833842,0.000038530714,0.00022115005,0.00045836874,0.00008557525,0.0018860798,0.000008272148],"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":[0.00009698697,0.000015465934,0.0036816665,0.00006900031,0.00029596622,0.0000617283,0.5398372,0.000018284458,0.0016269471,0.086188205,0.0015461426,0.3665624],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0018227951,0.00065531663,0.0036835065,0.00079412246,0.000997647,0.000583202,0.3965131,0.00045195952,0.00034382602,0.009592109,0.583764,0.0007984133],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00001273036,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0000020175914,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5822179,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001463141,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000012535656,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.81941825},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2146175970","doi":"","title":"Probing normalized institutional discourses about writing: The case of the doctoral thesis","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of academic language and learning","topic":"Discourse Analysis in Language Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":69,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Rhetorical question; Government (linguistics); Sociology; Academic writing; Professional writing; Vision; Pedagogy; Higher education; Perspective (graphical); Psychological intervention; Political science; Psychology; Linguistics","score_opus":0.01916321907251048,"score_gpt":0.28543804810820544,"score_spread":0.266274829035695,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2146175970","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9856707,0.005374334,0.00004687244,0.0012276282,0.00017798631,0.000054801767,0.0000026967575,0.000007949065,0.0074370513],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9972945,0.00013081665,0.00004338897,0.00022512767,0.0012919767,0.0000017539298,5.78051e-7,0.00000908456,0.001002762],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99879104,0.0003026926,0.00044029066,0.00008365001,0.00022312047,0.00015918099],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988333,0.00030259535,0.00061256567,0.00010310641,0.00011470223,0.00003374505],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013518583,0.00011535206,0.0002546886,0.000076096636,0.00079538015,0.00008701281,0.00024452843,0.00004115736,0.00020781098],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00062600884,0.00005247435,0.00016996263,0.000055922083,0.00058937987,0.00028839332,0.00009765444,0.00090432103,0.0000012318156],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00008785851,0.000069619884,0.009439455,0.00017802932,0.0008889804,0.00037081903,0.7115661,0.001860724,0.0025419632,0.1710984,0.0012184402,0.100679606],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013540266,0.00019517774,0.0019828195,0.001184771,0.0011804588,0.002120801,0.9079051,0.0011090536,0.0012599005,0.0008024128,0.0805089,0.00039654758],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00020687087,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00015948911,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.19633903,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000014543407,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003781147,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6117501},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2803987840","doi":"","title":"Using digital peer observation to balance professional development and performance evaluation","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of academic language and learning","topic":"Reflective Practices in Education","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Collegiality; CLARITY; Process (computing); Peer feedback; Professional development; Computer science; Psychology; Process management; Pedagogy; Business","score_opus":0.0843463409123782,"score_gpt":0.4553213590818707,"score_spread":0.3709750181694925,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2803987840","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9964774,0.00028667165,0.00032172663,0.0009219356,0.00035897878,0.0000784762,7.0788346e-8,0.000004435823,0.0015503046],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99139655,0.000037384685,0.006362161,0.00012811876,0.0007946952,0.0000012589181,7.5932405e-7,0.0000038718003,0.0012752231],"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989935,0.0001724977,0.00017540577,0.00007238811,0.0004851122,0.0001010837],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99911374,0.00009866935,0.0002706491,0.000019661798,0.0004328768,0.000064422915],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0032398081,0.000042220738,0.00006350157,0.00007085864,0.00041486754,0.000061919854,0.000058553098,0.00006197438,0.000027422426],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002801337,0.000035319546,0.000007078629,0.00013252486,0.000049702543,0.0011228756,0.000022713055,0.00040552748,0.0000029164448],"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":[0.000043314718,0.000009020108,0.2531051,0.000006585779,0.000009986672,4.943402e-7,0.2845092,0.000055761946,0.004222805,0.000029743689,0.00008781646,0.45792016],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00055718946,0.00024238422,0.70121014,0.00047393254,0.000049235103,0.000053288153,0.12046505,0.005853996,0.002668356,0.00015278651,0.16802976,0.00024388783],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000013447114,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000003095842,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4576763,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00013184926,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002961923,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.33536643},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}