{"meta":{"query_hash":"bee526e7a9cc","filters":{"venue":"New Zealand journal of public and international law"},"cohort_total":5,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":5,"exported":5,"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/bee526e7a9cc","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=New+Zealand+journal+of+public+and+international+law"},"results":[{"id":"W2211073227","doi":"","title":"Indigenous Autonomy and Justice in North America","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"New Zealand journal of public and international law","topic":"Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights","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":"Indigenous; Autonomy; Project commissioning; Economic Justice; Publishing; Sociology; Environmental ethics; Self-determination; Political science; Indigenous rights; Public administration; Social science; Law; Ecology","score_opus":0.01867803837209676,"score_gpt":0.29511080247661914,"score_spread":0.2764327641045224,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2211073227","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":[0.90518117,0.00056373613,0.0001680448,0.008629072,0.0010011544,0.00010979108,0.0000045062566,0.000007379678,0.08433514],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9787578,0.009429771,0.00074110035,0.00045320994,0.0014166896,3.4006612e-7,0.000006646529,0.000005547372,0.009188881],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99916005,0.000057674923,0.00026760873,0.00008522078,0.00022519323,0.00020423187],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992817,0.000057558485,0.00019450439,0.00003191061,0.00018914574,0.00024517646],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00041735097,0.00006174577,0.00011815792,0.00015561831,0.00072170247,0.0001302293,0.00015099221,0.000050884457,0.000054009328],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000120771065,0.00004815474,0.000022983035,0.00012409137,0.00015206564,0.0005249666,0.0000020137518,0.00015726205,0.0000035496696],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000024142706,0.00021951518,0.019524885,0.000009559222,0.00004014005,0.00001497659,0.3305917,0.000025436813,6.8357815e-7,0.6391288,0.0002329141,0.010187244],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005998692,0.000101917496,0.014783501,0.000013431538,0.00000968333,0.00003846009,0.001750542,0.0000016277678,0.0000012850041,0.007751211,0.9748864,0.000062081286],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0575999,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.49155003,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9746535,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00021529985,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007688712,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9979368},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2217361879","doi":"","title":"Rights-vetting in New Zealand and Canada: Similar Idea, Different Outcomes","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"New Zealand journal of public and international law","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"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":"Vetting; Charter; Legislation; Project commissioning; Law; Political science; Politics; Bureaucracy; Publishing; Obligation; Bill of rights; Public administration; Human rights; Law and economics; Sociology","score_opus":0.03275547374255387,"score_gpt":0.3047101050061511,"score_spread":0.2719546312635972,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2217361879","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":[0.73644984,0.00043316602,0.000026336873,0.25297803,0.00045995822,0.00005293206,0.0000046560817,0.0000056860404,0.009589422],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96873766,0.00033193117,0.00018557427,0.0011329553,0.0008720566,2.8878404e-7,0.0000016120448,0.0000042769334,0.02873363],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9987664,0.000065094326,0.00035465055,0.00011505449,0.00047424156,0.00022456235],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990803,0.00020845993,0.00018020914,0.00004123741,0.00010931826,0.0003804666],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00051486865,0.00010301314,0.00021244159,0.00008890784,0.00014645411,0.00021651055,0.00020629358,0.000052505053,0.00021463078],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00016332598,0.00007231107,0.000042309497,0.00004509696,0.00008055726,0.0006251403,0.00003894725,0.00018892922,9.3019383e-7],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00005073483,0.000072834635,0.5984774,0.0000043398086,0.000083862644,0.000038509217,0.0025461244,0.000010398976,0.000020667356,0.22975576,0.14384007,0.025099251],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00070401974,0.000039337167,0.11188284,0.000040623738,0.000011281909,0.000029370882,0.00022429638,0.000023766184,0.000007746998,0.006580982,0.88036704,0.00008868084],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.62344754,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9493472,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.73652697,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00016860789,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000565796,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.37905997},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2220102439","doi":"","title":"A Comparison of the Impact of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on Judicial Review of Administrative Action","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"New Zealand journal of public and international law","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","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":"Charter; Project commissioning; Law; Bill of rights; Publishing; Political science; Judicial review; Sociology; Public administration; Human rights","score_opus":0.08819755292381076,"score_gpt":0.3964468918595072,"score_spread":0.30824933893569645,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2220102439","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":[0.95123726,0.0023072318,0.000005472441,0.026453428,0.0004004449,0.00030633507,0.00004980404,0.0000010964678,0.019238902],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9984312,0.0007578999,0.000012776163,0.00007895514,0.00011304562,3.72082e-7,7.80375e-7,0.000002183657,0.00060276524],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986144,0.00025942008,0.0004978675,0.00007494056,0.0004469892,0.00010642548],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99824154,0.00024441298,0.00092180195,0.00008525092,0.00036530106,0.00014167588],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009026323,0.00008509508,0.00034702953,0.000062665684,0.0001479148,0.000028490103,0.00024062411,0.000056198573,0.00011178033],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00022630469,0.000034658246,0.00014127792,0.00012310641,0.0007556439,0.0002187431,0.000016936136,0.0001534863,7.704829e-8],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008522183,0.00036029628,0.14262858,0.00016543685,0.00071164704,0.0000016348083,0.018625645,0.000008271922,0.00044434617,0.7600497,0.0728891,0.0032631462],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00723595,0.003057727,0.4259647,0.007444619,0.000604126,0.00015832263,0.001525032,0.00006702536,0.005889366,0.20081545,0.3468674,0.00037024837],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.28380537,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.23710456,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5592342,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004469203,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006884983,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7768163},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2272968454","doi":"","title":"Judicial Review of the Executive - Principled Exasperation","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"New Zealand journal of public and international law","topic":"Legal principles and applications","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":"Cabinet (room); Project commissioning; Statutory law; Law; Management; Publishing; Queen (butterfly); Judicial review; Political science; Operations research; Engineering; Economics","score_opus":0.030568537566160955,"score_gpt":0.3255545468062269,"score_spread":0.29498600924006596,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2272968454","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.15770973,0.001745583,0.0004147668,0.32607695,0.002791493,0.00041798234,0.000029200517,0.000013910587,0.51080036],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9867261,0.002639,0.00023256883,0.0013258551,0.0010337862,0.0000013611152,0.0000021771762,0.0000030599376,0.008036075],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992206,0.00005411558,0.00027309725,0.000053484633,0.00032403535,0.00007468595],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990673,0.000052875363,0.0003102682,0.000058960573,0.00041700326,0.00009356452],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007586696,0.00004093722,0.00009719069,0.000026353337,0.00015444425,0.000061196646,0.000280878,0.00003819256,0.0003083026],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00031948023,0.00002587936,0.000068043824,0.00008778855,0.00016331063,0.00029955374,0.00003924663,0.00018358251,0.0000015105878],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000036272922,0.000032832395,0.0020071259,0.0000076450915,0.00001848578,1.7711615e-7,0.00037086842,1.9341466e-7,0.00039207452,0.98452836,0.009364641,0.0032739406],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021857914,0.000019532199,0.005628991,0.00011983035,0.000012405836,0.0000103362345,0.000058429647,0.0000058391092,0.00009665701,0.010324888,0.9834723,0.00003225246],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005190096,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0013880167,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9742035,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000019826364,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00032420125,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3375697},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2398323668","doi":"","title":"Review and appeal in civil aviation de-licensing regimes: A comparative study of New Zealand, Australia and Canada","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"New Zealand journal of public and international law","topic":"International Law and Aviation","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Civil aviation; Tribunal; Project commissioning; Publishing; Aviation; Political science; Law; High Court; Engineering; Management; Public administration; Economics","score_opus":0.05168192377283623,"score_gpt":0.3332089948969639,"score_spread":0.28152707112412767,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2398323668","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":[0.9779303,0.00072759454,0.000027196633,0.017699895,0.00017798283,0.00022020515,0.000004822216,0.000002647171,0.0032093255],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99048567,0.0010376443,0.00009571069,0.0005041575,0.00021629783,0.0000013062134,0.0000049195924,0.0000031575823,0.0076511493],"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.998909,0.00012985247,0.0003959435,0.00010154592,0.0003317414,0.00013192535],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989743,0.000095256946,0.0003673355,0.00003204568,0.00034732567,0.00018373718],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005595919,0.0000814717,0.00022445549,0.000089394074,0.00007423353,0.000117184725,0.000111229,0.00003946536,0.0001180666],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009530214,0.000068549176,0.000019297957,0.00007666066,0.00005926495,0.00063962454,0.00002355325,0.00013381563,5.444034e-7],"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":[0.00007719608,0.00032910652,0.5403507,0.00006240482,0.00029966372,0.000010768936,0.017379714,0.000012753262,0.000077410776,0.23956302,0.195931,0.0059062876],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0043500117,0.00057232386,0.6006399,0.00085606397,0.00011312022,0.00011111934,0.0055972952,0.00011566237,0.000019623385,0.017730607,0.3695863,0.0003080233],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7806538,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8201025,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.22183242,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012359091,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000410997,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.27953544},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}