{"meta":{"query_hash":"e72c25461911","filters":{"venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal"},"cohort_total":12,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":12,"exported":12,"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/e72c25461911","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Oxford+University+Commonwealth+Law+Journal"},"results":[{"id":"W1520347466","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2015.1047651","title":"<i>R v Hart</i>: A New Common Law Confession Rule for Undercover Operations","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","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":true,"ca_institutions":"Thompson Rivers University","funders":"","keywords":"Confession (law); Law; Supreme court; Commonwealth; Suspect; Jurisprudence; Political science; Criminal procedure; Common law; Criminal law; Certainty; Exclusionary rule; Sociology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.04186499080328038,"score_gpt":0.31676668930801893,"score_spread":0.27490169850473856,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1520347466","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":[0.042480752,0.0057346947,0.0461278,0.31144992,0.0072127907,0.0011100569,0.0020728756,0.0010828234,0.5827282],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.51150185,0.0021719646,0.041598782,0.32648382,0.0033299106,0.00060371193,0.0006097353,0.00031071418,0.1133896],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.964783,0.0037652382,0.0024961077,0.004616893,0.018130437,0.0062083253],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9757237,0.008883552,0.0014257063,0.002214998,0.0102648055,0.0014872822],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016451756,0.0006729333,0.0013726596,0.0018431734,0.013712869,0.01725457,0.009261273,0.024574665,0.002976702],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03703618,0.0016883509,0.0018139422,0.0015987973,0.017740935,0.005706708,0.003582894,0.02306518,0.0014682163],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002776345,0.000024010451,0.00089744764,0.000056402645,0.00001869629,0.00043762324,0.0029625266,0.00028807967,0.000559325,0.8592278,0.12849903,0.0070014508],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014649938,0.000094323004,0.005563113,0.00087980524,0.00018878431,0.00089909055,0.0031667023,0.0032299391,0.003057551,0.2221525,0.7600986,0.0005231915],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8287508,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8783827,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8287508,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.036592044,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.08921358,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.34451544},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1591818506","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2015.1047655","title":"Good Faith Duties in Contract Performance","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":52,"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":"Fair dealing; Law; Honesty; Good faith; Obligation; Bad faith; Loyalty; Power (physics); Faith; Unconscionability; Business; Law and economics; Political science; Sociology","score_opus":0.01579050959091266,"score_gpt":0.2533316598242262,"score_spread":0.2375411502333135,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1591818506","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":[0.053933572,0.0029731032,0.065958574,0.040075097,0.00061800197,0.00024642062,0.00006136322,0.00011706547,0.83601683],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.93336505,0.0010577957,0.012835231,0.0057368227,0.00032604646,0.00016050381,0.0000377613,0.000059457307,0.046421368],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9690064,0.012308253,0.0020412412,0.0028466433,0.009782193,0.004015211],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97256327,0.011109928,0.0028394416,0.0056962245,0.004769606,0.00302159],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02322553,0.0005763579,0.00077837304,0.0013852621,0.008207702,0.01031822,0.0022847936,0.008440062,0.0057054446],"category_scores_gemma":[0.037818268,0.00058267615,0.0007319877,0.0012704058,0.060282305,0.008467978,0.009986011,0.009819522,0.0013399911],"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":[0.000003935038,0.000012556446,0.00018515496,0.000014603661,0.0000023961402,0.000057158908,0.0022095784,0.00017277988,0.0000755059,0.9935086,0.00091513846,0.0028426],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002139321,0.00006120481,0.001135149,0.00024557387,0.000010837727,0.00030999925,0.002252203,0.0008195309,0.00037616843,0.91954803,0.075174466,0.000045402558],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008488028,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006769514,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02322553,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00638629,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.011626394,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.122829795},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2031535197","doi":"10.5235/147293412803188829","title":"Ontario's Administrative Tribunal Clusters: A Glass Half-full or Half-empty for Administrative Justice?","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Legal Education and Practice Innovations","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":"Dalhousie University; York University","funders":"","keywords":"Tribunal; Economic Justice; Statutory law; Government (linguistics); Political science; Public administration; Administrative law; Business; Quality (philosophy); Law","score_opus":0.14550716466108246,"score_gpt":0.40249299024392743,"score_spread":0.256985825582845,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2031535197","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":[0.31730792,0.0027271472,0.006625328,0.3329033,0.0010302286,0.00028643836,0.00039646693,0.00027980807,0.3384434],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.927221,0.0006126723,0.0023062257,0.009747002,0.000090169364,0.000073511386,0.000093550065,0.000068125686,0.059787687],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99611807,0.0005285277,0.00006511515,0.00034440184,0.001118686,0.0018252298],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99501747,0.00055559404,0.00030038698,0.0005848833,0.0012040789,0.002337679],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002380187,0.00022148395,0.0003237703,0.0006577546,0.028196596,0.009571754,0.0020795916,0.0032119316,0.008270859],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008098624,0.00039414308,0.0003606277,0.0015381975,0.016112125,0.00506503,0.004812355,0.002695057,0.00064394117],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","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":[0.00012563987,0.000074557516,0.017279958,0.0001320812,0.00003487057,0.0007678274,0.056269553,0.0008978906,0.0011245247,0.6411528,0.21447517,0.067665175],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000078994155,0.000060328144,0.03139375,0.00017294055,0.000039993785,0.00018198421,0.089332856,0.0013012723,0.00045846787,0.046726696,0.83013105,0.00012170453],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.94524586,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98371774,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.93075866,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.06924133,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.121440664,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.50238335},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2036854270","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2006.11421463","title":"Fairness and Equality in The Criminal Process","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"European Criminal Justice and Data Protection","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Political science; Law; Process (computing); Law and economics; Criminology; Sociology; Computer science; Programming language","score_opus":0.0364001800636866,"score_gpt":0.3040428577709776,"score_spread":0.267642677707291,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2036854270","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11832166,0.014398254,0.28579995,0.040945847,0.0011718213,0.00030528582,0.00014031773,0.00006606823,0.5388508],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9665205,0.0016121159,0.017881114,0.0016259744,0.00068421324,0.0002122043,0.000026877773,0.00003309076,0.011403907],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9495254,0.032277886,0.0016987348,0.0041977405,0.008187013,0.0041132187],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95827585,0.030987736,0.0023364513,0.003599478,0.003348638,0.0014518262],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03496854,0.0005526293,0.0012691239,0.002922848,0.0080713965,0.008717139,0.0016147485,0.004034966,0.004356349],"category_scores_gemma":[0.053075783,0.0004613472,0.001113863,0.0018085343,0.040884964,0.012158126,0.009971456,0.004668771,0.00049958576],"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":[0.000008546412,0.0000053823974,0.00020218303,0.000013256042,0.000003998424,0.000021246522,0.00050324074,0.00032161965,0.000023468241,0.9958061,0.0001404215,0.0029505587],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008690334,0.0000111249155,0.0002654665,0.00004990641,0.0000049360533,0.00003124669,0.0001893971,0.00057099666,0.00006834707,0.9933107,0.005481709,0.0000075677954],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0043985196,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0024778894,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03496854,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0070157275,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009111036,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.18493354},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2081040206","doi":"10.5235/147293411797394397","title":"Towards a Jurisprudence of Constitutional Conventions","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"BC Research (Canada)","funders":"","keywords":"Justiciability; Jurisprudence; Constitution; Law; Political science; Proposition; Enforcement; Politics; Law and economics; Constitutional law; Subject (documents); Sociology; Epistemology; Computer science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.055376148452998486,"score_gpt":0.2838432333722492,"score_spread":0.22846708491925072,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2081040206","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":[0.015500885,0.016255656,0.14318326,0.29065603,0.0030127456,0.00017923464,0.0001302628,0.00015375255,0.5309282],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.79996246,0.0076530837,0.092765786,0.044694602,0.005271053,0.0008429363,0.0001697778,0.00034660276,0.048293594],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.966076,0.019493135,0.0012175565,0.0041681994,0.007423511,0.0016216],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97155964,0.016978784,0.001715095,0.0048484784,0.0032915408,0.0016064761],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.04724129,0.00087295426,0.0017761404,0.0044135335,0.009978029,0.019186858,0.004300127,0.018491201,0.0027647284],"category_scores_gemma":[0.042484336,0.0011469688,0.0014618037,0.00234807,0.11002261,0.019372437,0.009566589,0.03669212,0.0011476213],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[6.29796e-7,0.0000020912692,0.000008463844,0.000003077962,4.948514e-7,0.0000050785698,0.00033537508,0.000032181713,0.000011992148,0.99896526,0.00035377717,0.00028147947],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008282182,0.0000046737023,0.00004016781,0.00003615943,0.0000013278728,0.000010955212,0.000234501,0.00015854515,0.000038601796,0.9696092,0.029852321,0.0000052490095],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007262805,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004511135,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04724129,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012728034,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01610669,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24983877},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2081954869","doi":"10.5235/147293410794895287","title":"Canada's ‘Orphan Works’ Regime: Unlocatable Copyright Owners and the Copyright Board","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Intellectual Property Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":32,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Canadian Heritage","funders":"","keywords":"Commonwealth; Copyright law; Law; Political science; Common law copyright; Law and economics; Intellectual property; Economics","score_opus":0.009360850431118319,"score_gpt":0.2184555939818756,"score_spread":0.2090947435507573,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2081954869","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":[0.031533647,0.023610597,0.0024613102,0.3275523,0.0015904529,0.00010034633,0.0011645337,0.0001935891,0.61179316],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.47483855,0.010495425,0.0020833095,0.11621884,0.00092540326,0.00013109048,0.0003622342,0.00019294501,0.39475214],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9915673,0.00043541705,0.00018678932,0.00048465288,0.0047267755,0.00259916],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9924908,0.00216838,0.000399255,0.0003204859,0.0035114223,0.001109524],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0037936969,0.00046155503,0.0005148555,0.0015143262,0.025380166,0.012765015,0.0026409104,0.017377585,0.011837978],"category_scores_gemma":[0.013889813,0.0006998149,0.00056308304,0.0026500898,0.011606422,0.0058412813,0.0028372733,0.010228665,0.0013664485],"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":[0.00003992197,0.000023072278,0.0013272655,0.00005865051,0.000008754336,0.00036296961,0.0063182455,0.0001311289,0.00028898043,0.6184671,0.36087132,0.01210268],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006218903,0.000026812268,0.008112561,0.0003492155,0.00004344012,0.00018563274,0.0038932734,0.00039451022,0.00085709494,0.033188332,0.9527858,0.00010113605],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9698629,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.98758954,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.059766635,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.059766635,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.14964,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.43363935},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2473080226","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2005.11421452","title":"Statutory Limitation Periods and the Traditional Representative Action Procedure","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Dispute Resolution and Class Actions","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Statutory law; Action (physics); Order (exchange); Federal court; Political science; Commonwealth; Statutory interpretation; High Court; Business; Supreme court","score_opus":0.04205754940978738,"score_gpt":0.24605602946236166,"score_spread":0.2039984800525743,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2473080226","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":[0.017329706,0.0017993627,0.34729552,0.0068057035,0.0008587616,0.0005776039,0.00029610566,0.00042080245,0.6246165],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.57944715,0.0019110908,0.23410322,0.007630043,0.0014901335,0.0027197392,0.0004418662,0.00032156476,0.17193522],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98112327,0.006941918,0.0012773159,0.0027546787,0.006698519,0.0012043754],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98429835,0.009248584,0.0008953389,0.0036055106,0.0017176806,0.00023460889],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.020084726,0.0005497655,0.00062469643,0.0018488828,0.0027805336,0.005343175,0.002994867,0.004936828,0.014081947],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03209999,0.0008184478,0.00076855836,0.0023233437,0.011605318,0.008704778,0.0034344592,0.0063109756,0.00575494],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000012161002,0.000007764152,0.000042702224,0.000013488785,0.0000016518476,0.000024173927,0.00026189187,0.00011559249,0.00011974799,0.9890491,0.0020943256,0.0082573695],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000422924,0.000047556878,0.0002798922,0.00011701027,0.000012899829,0.000165855,0.00014446166,0.0022258407,0.00087490556,0.89019626,0.10586103,0.000032001582],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0021599014,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0020019086,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.020084726,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002613857,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004705964,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10621947},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2547042486","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2016.1244451","title":"The meta-constitution: amendment, recognition, and the continuing puzzle of supreme law in Canada","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","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":"Constitution; Law; Supreme court; Political science; Constitutional law; Limited government; Judicial review","score_opus":0.039699736664320764,"score_gpt":0.23535951758762744,"score_spread":0.19565978092330666,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2547042486","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":[0.18433124,0.010485194,0.010761487,0.12910622,0.0006392259,0.00010653144,0.00042374822,0.00017020009,0.6639762],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9705142,0.0014727557,0.0020774144,0.0058349636,0.00007935773,0.000024683839,0.000060539835,0.00005015283,0.019886043],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98997796,0.001362428,0.00024620027,0.00103275,0.0038729915,0.003507723],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99233776,0.0029921024,0.00034437,0.00065805827,0.0026602808,0.0010075067],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006169682,0.0002731229,0.00080846256,0.0021675404,0.026463576,0.016634334,0.0027039677,0.005097987,0.0047048633],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015388603,0.000508918,0.00065705535,0.003842407,0.028891543,0.0047909296,0.004648575,0.0097473925,0.00025718758],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000008868407,0.000004480818,0.0007916695,0.000016720847,0.000006886886,0.00012231349,0.004307696,0.00035260723,0.00010686886,0.9832761,0.0052156737,0.0057901302],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000074902535,0.000031313033,0.014739387,0.00052603526,0.000117836535,0.00024233012,0.016034918,0.004838064,0.00114224,0.4708362,0.49115872,0.0002580894],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.98828584,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99197364,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1674814,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1674814,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.22544064,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9656036},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2556718980","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2002.11421416","title":"Lord Cooke of Thorndon's Final Appeal (<i>Delaware Mansions Ltd v Westminster City Council</i>)","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Law; Political science; Commonwealth; Art","score_opus":0.10216009995123092,"score_gpt":0.27387997332235225,"score_spread":0.17171987337112132,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2556718980","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.008130612,0.029004307,0.0008612242,0.3873128,0.010492402,0.00028185922,0.0025224013,0.00027246555,0.561122],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.050466478,0.003534833,0.000582532,0.23933947,0.001211728,0.00018846364,0.00038568943,0.000109727305,0.70418096],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.997712,0.00022546138,0.00012077358,0.0002870125,0.0010003343,0.0006543688],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980647,0.0006807069,0.00009105707,0.00006348169,0.0008110846,0.00028901995],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0017758801,0.00058452203,0.0006050495,0.0009140875,0.01356037,0.0059733465,0.0017629747,0.018309066,0.047226794],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008868622,0.0011449063,0.0007814781,0.00092518335,0.0027251951,0.002898729,0.002423195,0.01161624,0.013297647],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000020354997,0.000008264331,0.00034430364,0.000038968734,0.0000041364688,0.00019963838,0.00034427852,0.0000144340875,0.000103477134,0.015891315,0.9793854,0.0036454431],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000038841754,0.00002460853,0.0043287934,0.00033444673,0.000027852,0.00014938266,0.0013765838,0.00007022562,0.0003039604,0.0054054726,0.98788583,0.000054029908],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4234008,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7288038,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.4234008,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008557525,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.011494611,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.84187263},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2896173369","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2018.1530862","title":"Exclusive rights of patent owners versus rights of chattel owners: the implied licence approach","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"Victoria University","keywords":"Scope (computer science); Law; Patent law; Business; Common law; Law and economics; Exclusive right; Political science; Intellectual property; Economics","score_opus":0.049150318670832915,"score_gpt":0.2853740135228697,"score_spread":0.23622369485203676,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2896173369","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":[0.112668045,0.003008117,0.121219054,0.0463782,0.00030798005,0.00031418804,0.00019262536,0.00008606749,0.7158257],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9623224,0.00084146304,0.006684974,0.003361608,0.00027766667,0.00034738766,0.000039538772,0.000034614735,0.02609043],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9785161,0.009325353,0.001171991,0.0029346298,0.005460441,0.002591541],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.963152,0.024169823,0.0035718721,0.005319395,0.0026919872,0.0010949286],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01779667,0.00063697324,0.0009114753,0.0033345053,0.0058362163,0.013123508,0.0033714816,0.014534228,0.011766493],"category_scores_gemma":[0.049337365,0.00073297607,0.0012586478,0.0018307798,0.046353962,0.025966238,0.008980245,0.010728653,0.001063641],"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":[0.0000074498544,0.000012262427,0.0003385474,0.00001583923,0.0000031292798,0.00008027004,0.00097438024,0.000089528585,0.00006723483,0.9959359,0.00032603974,0.0021494105],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004184487,0.00006322569,0.0014528013,0.0003175108,0.000038230635,0.00042933447,0.0019371654,0.001751824,0.00045811638,0.96334445,0.03011678,0.000048612794],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008426302,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0063463235,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01779667,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0057561514,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0068338253,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09411889},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3033719684","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2020.1773017","title":"Remedying formal irregularities in wills: a comparative analysis of testamentary rescue in Canada and South Africa","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"National Research Foundation; Louisiana State University","keywords":"Testamentary trust; Law; Statute; Jurisprudence; Political science; Sociology","score_opus":0.03996326956342198,"score_gpt":0.2599483294766122,"score_spread":0.21998505991319026,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3033719684","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":[0.89741784,0.0022741593,0.00050735415,0.0061031063,0.000041636875,0.00016962388,0.00020069376,0.0000102749655,0.093275376],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.992576,0.0012888169,0.0003565532,0.00055679283,0.00000395476,0.000028540908,0.000068830996,0.000010356626,0.005110142],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99530715,0.00052323716,0.00011873101,0.00022976211,0.0009812475,0.0028398945],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99263835,0.0024588422,0.0008779793,0.00022365137,0.0024399285,0.0013612319],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022396562,0.00034722878,0.00052949967,0.00507989,0.02131718,0.006023744,0.0017465241,0.0013710303,0.004740455],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01226886,0.00040221462,0.00035403247,0.00727863,0.009819131,0.0018276185,0.0041773557,0.002804088,0.0001795718],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00027657257,0.00017502868,0.13797913,0.0007112386,0.0001522374,0.009875566,0.46246356,0.0019810786,0.0028903543,0.30784392,0.010204905,0.06544651],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003937057,0.000043613716,0.21897087,0.0011554391,0.000111652706,0.0008698404,0.6454155,0.00080501265,0.0010444847,0.005054621,0.12636174,0.00012786685],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9879866,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.99697876,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.10996488,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.10996488,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.13333382,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7978548},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3210046552","doi":"10.1080/14729342.2021.1991648","title":"The HMCS Unconscionability: adrift in the Atlantic","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal","topic":"Corporate Law and Human Rights","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":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Unconscionability; Doctrine; Reinterpretation; Law; Commonwealth; Supreme court; Political science; Law and economics; Sociology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.017214623016518733,"score_gpt":0.2026091340541372,"score_spread":0.18539451103761845,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3210046552","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":[0.0503723,0.0027700802,0.0032624723,0.07023173,0.00082130905,0.0000357796,0.0001030678,0.000046405818,0.87235683],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8443275,0.0015941494,0.00149417,0.0310656,0.00045372284,0.000034332385,0.00005650809,0.000055500914,0.120918594],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9944694,0.0005075349,0.00010240057,0.0005125708,0.0028800396,0.0015279651],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99719465,0.0008049396,0.00012161929,0.00025604956,0.0012144375,0.0004082621],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0034035665,0.00019408282,0.00031415152,0.0010964198,0.01149178,0.0076294546,0.0015823495,0.0057575707,0.010857319],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007091075,0.00032013527,0.00040569153,0.0010610218,0.019453783,0.0038339584,0.004012126,0.008369033,0.0008410284],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000014127456,0.000008429496,0.00047454395,0.000012217494,0.000002650059,0.00013205355,0.0020963927,0.00007668768,0.00019225576,0.97981834,0.009260389,0.0079119485],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000054690932,0.000047442,0.0060178507,0.0004932,0.00004288963,0.00024102964,0.0068755937,0.0013359381,0.0010088538,0.3079774,0.6758114,0.00009375555],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.72589433,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.82503957,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.72589433,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.032070793,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.033161007,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5514399},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}