{"meta":{"query_hash":"b551b66d04c7","filters":{"venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric"},"cohort_total":31,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":31,"exported":31,"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/b551b66d04c7","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Philosophy+and+Rhetoric"},"results":[{"id":"W1550479137","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.45.2.0107","title":"The Late Fourteenth-Century Renaissance of Anglo-Latin Rhetoric","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Medieval Literature and History","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":34,"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":"Rhetoric; Vernacular; The Renaissance; Poetry; Literature; Quarter (Canadian coin); Rhetorical question; Art; Classics; Middle Ages; The arts; History; Philosophy; Art history; Ancient history; Theology; Visual arts; Archaeology","score_opus":0.036429420607213873,"score_gpt":0.2253976647327588,"score_spread":0.18896824412554492,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1550479137","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":[0.21516281,0.022659434,0.0031258329,0.024547173,0.0010952957,0.000035455203,0.000067479814,0.00007958667,0.7332268],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96354586,0.002222936,0.0006229107,0.0014426035,0.00030017807,0.000023095561,0.000018244236,0.00006330172,0.031760927],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99715614,0.0018453413,0.000086937995,0.0002761198,0.00040021734,0.00023527203],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9962901,0.002088625,0.00036362608,0.00024505678,0.0007819276,0.00023059716],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0057683988,0.0002793318,0.00025326308,0.0018716948,0.0044942778,0.0082008885,0.00045831074,0.00091087463,0.0031578362],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004640599,0.00021740404,0.00013024973,0.0011054866,0.023459336,0.0025851647,0.003090005,0.00326278,0.0004125025],"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":[0.000040304953,0.000018951776,0.0009118625,0.00008222485,0.0000061333267,0.00018323457,0.1059802,0.000053517742,0.00057021604,0.8797824,0.0029564411,0.009414461],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003133418,0.0000470541,0.004289243,0.000633315,0.000011408659,0.00031997426,0.032903615,0.00017382488,0.0013168614,0.052528664,0.9077186,0.00002604017],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00659894,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008962778,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.011256666,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011256666,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0028471628,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.081673205},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1663408855","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0508","title":"Rhetorical Argumentation and the Nature of Audience:","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Rhetoric and Communication Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":23,"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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Rhetorical question; Epistemology; Identity (music); Rhetoric; Sociology; Psychology; Philosophy; Linguistics; Aesthetics","score_opus":0.030197498571487784,"score_gpt":0.24827549038768768,"score_spread":0.21807799181619988,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1663408855","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":[0.12959968,0.015872769,0.11839561,0.07281781,0.0012047305,0.00009884684,0.00006544165,0.00013952234,0.66180557],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99025565,0.0010124089,0.0035263486,0.0009544856,0.000363393,0.00004521393,0.000012781738,0.000034722536,0.0037950363],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9597449,0.033460222,0.00074973045,0.0014014131,0.0036619934,0.0009818549],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.93557376,0.053281255,0.0035384006,0.001962707,0.0041523036,0.0014915398],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.026640017,0.0006226799,0.0009863507,0.004547739,0.0074642175,0.018432373,0.0016407617,0.007364469,0.005046247],"category_scores_gemma":[0.043945488,0.000402238,0.00053820026,0.002582553,0.04459286,0.02220598,0.0081034945,0.005171684,0.00061870366],"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":[0.000017735809,0.000011969422,0.00020217268,0.00006967857,0.0000049473133,0.000063638545,0.013251055,0.00012026776,0.00010271166,0.98257494,0.0005959768,0.002984907],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000026522272,0.000025398107,0.00033209118,0.0004099315,0.000012755318,0.00015144072,0.010022574,0.0012703626,0.0002831685,0.9635942,0.023857716,0.000013922338],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0006920387,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00043019463,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.026640017,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005105064,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002521802,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14088756},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W189575033","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.46.2.0156","title":"The Absence of Rhetorical Theory in Richard Rorty's Linguistic Pragmatism","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Pragmatism; Rhetorical question; Linguistic turn; Rhetoric; Democracy; Epistemology; Philosophy; Political philosophy; Sociology; Politics; Linguistics; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.027691385268354036,"score_gpt":0.24296589979237052,"score_spread":0.21527451452401647,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W189575033","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":[0.09224766,0.011990332,0.102396235,0.3883537,0.0014768114,0.00006994739,0.000041972657,0.00040076132,0.4030225],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9738921,0.0010063789,0.007364655,0.0067300256,0.0005574324,0.00007214361,0.000008164871,0.000084957646,0.0102841025],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97174263,0.02214878,0.00057967124,0.0014560876,0.0032071415,0.0008656352],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9560722,0.035476632,0.002345966,0.0027776756,0.002639788,0.00068768224],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.020322824,0.00034284426,0.00076645415,0.0021006784,0.0063679502,0.010044481,0.0016009606,0.0054496364,0.0015933819],"category_scores_gemma":[0.029536514,0.00053676066,0.00067861914,0.00084652856,0.05021307,0.009078711,0.005857067,0.009994241,0.0006843207],"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":[0.000008310621,0.000006825701,0.000045789526,0.00001996331,0.0000025232487,0.000043865308,0.0053363363,0.00015434597,0.000069699076,0.9911095,0.0012684056,0.0019344087],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000021197939,0.000023663622,0.00008831583,0.00010651967,0.0000065255313,0.000115855706,0.0018716506,0.0010719568,0.00036066512,0.95744973,0.038862884,0.000021114916],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0017339407,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011317385,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.020322824,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005183697,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003990703,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10747868},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1926220562","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0570","title":"Figural Logic in Gregor Mendel's “Experiments on Plant Hybrids”","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Botanical Research and Chemistry","field":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","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":"University of Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Metaphor; Argumentation theory; Rhetoric; Synecdoche; Antithesis; Philosophy; Reification (Marxism); Epistemology; Linguistics; Metonymy; Literature; Art; Law","score_opus":0.045143778500338745,"score_gpt":0.24728880297779737,"score_spread":0.20214502447745863,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1926220562","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":[0.084173076,0.006898767,0.13433298,0.12587787,0.0026249485,0.0001001977,0.00016887583,0.00038322844,0.64544],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96962714,0.0006571366,0.013750256,0.00421256,0.0004002852,0.000070136826,0.000022051985,0.000060753326,0.011199688],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9932755,0.005676001,0.00008025009,0.00029022765,0.000558585,0.00011939622],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9880937,0.01049938,0.00037151112,0.0004241467,0.00048043972,0.00013082587],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008353862,0.00039810152,0.00033916242,0.0012741133,0.0033635243,0.0033381062,0.001017047,0.0028534946,0.0039592697],"category_scores_gemma":[0.013563069,0.00023012374,0.00030706608,0.0007149827,0.01972022,0.0057810275,0.0024419148,0.0026847788,0.00041329523],"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":[0.000013250712,0.0000047311346,0.000025749621,0.000013761043,0.0000020735215,0.000028698752,0.0025029755,0.00009797377,0.00013949923,0.99326646,0.0020787534,0.0018260577],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000047397163,0.000046318197,0.00016463126,0.00014894556,0.000013812448,0.00008927003,0.0023133825,0.001118995,0.0010340424,0.8457699,0.14923033,0.000023095743],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0011366144,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011793666,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.99663645,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00361866,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00073496817,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.044179976},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2008435593","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.48.1.0054","title":"Guide(s) for the Perplexed","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Rhetoric and Communication Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":2,"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":"Rhetorical question; Rhetoric; Subjectivity; Epistemology; Value (mathematics); Subject (documents); Consciousness; Sociology; Phenomenon; Social life; Order (exchange); Philosophy; Aesthetics; Social science; Linguistics; Computer science","score_opus":0.17806483517252428,"score_gpt":0.29687968824305805,"score_spread":0.11881485307053377,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2008435593","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":[0.0026942373,0.003583015,0.09231818,0.10696741,0.054765802,0.0045995507,0.009828473,0.024231147,0.70101213],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.007893097,0.0013703424,0.052363634,0.019727811,0.0037070957,0.0023143624,0.0023102749,0.0055474155,0.904766],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99621564,0.001495088,0.00035655726,0.00046340583,0.001222065,0.00024727214],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98273724,0.0052608047,0.0006499347,0.0029454036,0.0063466374,0.0020598678],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0051446045,0.0011199344,0.0008792124,0.002843752,0.0028541638,0.0052143764,0.0024884664,0.004149661,0.46370855],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03030022,0.00065376505,0.00096545176,0.0011688292,0.0021403062,0.004488557,0.005148767,0.005066347,0.40394253],"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":[0.000030475192,0.000028437853,0.000057938298,0.00013921253,0.0000020768655,0.00011392339,0.0005304524,0.000046445333,0.0003643445,0.0074954927,0.9247353,0.066455886],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000056790377,0.000008399751,0.000031888416,0.00008360834,0.0000010289024,0.000114232535,0.00020473861,0.000050301227,0.00009816526,0.0018238516,0.997572,0.0000060702846],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002343179,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0045662415,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.46370855,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001666388,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0042240294,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7649547},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2059759980","doi":"10.1353/par.0.0000","title":"On Common Knowledge and &lt;i&gt;Ad Populum&lt;/i&gt;: Acceptance as Grounds for Acceptability","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":26,"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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Argument (complex analysis); Rhetorical question; Nothing; Epistemology; Persuasion; Context (archaeology); Dialogic; Set (abstract data type); Computer science; Psychology; Philosophy; Social psychology; Linguistics","score_opus":0.03908586551773882,"score_gpt":0.2801424699484467,"score_spread":0.2410566044307079,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2059759980","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":[0.010746971,0.017853204,0.06593339,0.21666206,0.0020775702,0.00016526744,0.00015879872,0.00013422381,0.68626845],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.830526,0.0092662675,0.024777519,0.027717125,0.005216749,0.0009488816,0.00018792218,0.0005261805,0.100833386],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.97859496,0.01389188,0.000675613,0.00230652,0.003356306,0.0011746783],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97514343,0.018073406,0.00092070515,0.0020460777,0.003068641,0.00074771856],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.016981544,0.001064633,0.0016892047,0.0024956947,0.009205963,0.016807074,0.0025062533,0.012040828,0.011951077],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03051812,0.0008016381,0.0014987849,0.0025740454,0.060301505,0.026989399,0.008136018,0.015497863,0.0031240243],"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":[0.0000077641835,0.00000514205,0.000038414146,0.00002299427,0.0000027053402,0.0000316142,0.0007304237,0.000092880146,0.000019456798,0.99308515,0.0041563157,0.0018071963],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000071929326,0.000004115612,0.00004504497,0.000060731913,0.000002535533,0.00001618373,0.00022190654,0.0002360406,0.00002637225,0.98461056,0.014762834,0.000006543253],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0077390014,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0033718213,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.016981544,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0123115545,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0041532037,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08980805},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2096863564","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.45.2.0148","title":"Rhetoric, Dialectic, and Logic as Related to Argument","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Language, Metaphor, and Cognition","field":"Psychology","cited_by":29,"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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Dialectic; Rhetoric; Argument (complex analysis); Epistemology; Rhetorical question; Argument map; Philosophy; Linguistics; Argumentation theory","score_opus":0.031175810664643394,"score_gpt":0.3006801159728074,"score_spread":0.26950430530816405,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2096863564","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":[0.1480136,0.053345058,0.12084667,0.06398248,0.0012346715,0.00012393024,0.0001188264,0.00019839968,0.61213636],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9829828,0.0031311498,0.009644515,0.0011787892,0.0003010808,0.00006812897,0.000029057215,0.00004009888,0.002624406],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9861616,0.010835478,0.00030989145,0.0005595305,0.0016515024,0.00048205812],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98161215,0.014217113,0.0015427901,0.00070270326,0.0012679697,0.00065726344],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009788797,0.00047949055,0.0007412918,0.0056048464,0.0029715863,0.012904882,0.000848291,0.0029252183,0.0034386136],"category_scores_gemma":[0.017123573,0.00036599208,0.00047976826,0.0035884823,0.04166619,0.011998981,0.003788658,0.00364821,0.00042642246],"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":[0.000008648815,0.000008658544,0.00012886885,0.000047092104,0.000004352374,0.00003398594,0.0023078173,0.00018223285,0.00008504457,0.99473107,0.00027824368,0.0021839659],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000009395679,0.000007637846,0.00019536416,0.000059236358,0.0000046840137,0.00004553645,0.0013022588,0.0004001245,0.00008108844,0.99131703,0.0065708957,0.0000067055093],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010909775,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0007234501,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.012904882,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0056519597,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0034780009,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05176872},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2322747704","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.43.4.0337","title":"Ways of Being Reasonable:","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Hannah Arendt's Political Philosophy","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Icon; Windsor; Rhetoric; Citation; Download; State (computer science); Publishing; Library science; World Wide Web; Computer science; Art; Literature; Philosophy; Algorithm; Linguistics","score_opus":0.0437671729541827,"score_gpt":0.2906555638302812,"score_spread":0.24688839087609848,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2322747704","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":[0.00880933,0.019227752,0.0028337752,0.14085248,0.0028825004,0.000032948727,0.00011540864,0.000051294293,0.8251946],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6798514,0.013264858,0.0023666697,0.015413398,0.002203131,0.00008433496,0.0001856871,0.00011470199,0.28651574],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9973449,0.0013490297,0.000093677656,0.00029181544,0.00065122335,0.00026934908],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99846435,0.0005855188,0.0001450196,0.00019265218,0.00035095512,0.00026147027],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0036025348,0.00035488908,0.00034672878,0.0010346994,0.005106638,0.007356596,0.0005263757,0.0027514806,0.020034391],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0054305946,0.00027991433,0.0003003081,0.0011067183,0.014119546,0.00986426,0.0029904393,0.004283717,0.0027371908],"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":[0.000010224568,0.00001048988,0.00017440236,0.000037010403,0.0000022116608,0.000034597317,0.006215671,0.000025513185,0.000037516085,0.9028217,0.07976013,0.010870673],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000006827416,0.000016972828,0.00076105073,0.00025100235,0.0000062506633,0.00016744887,0.00837355,0.00006159824,0.00007599349,0.2834783,0.7067914,0.0000096282],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0039715003,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0065779765,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.020034391,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004788543,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0044754343,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06702173},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2768152958","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.50.4.0528","title":"On Rhetoric and the School of Philosophy Without Tears","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Rhetoric; Argument (complex analysis); Rhetorical question; Epistemology; Philosophy; Transitive relation; Sociology; Linguistics; Medicine","score_opus":0.06001572697176672,"score_gpt":0.27465377199035973,"score_spread":0.21463804501859302,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2768152958","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":[0.043540224,0.026389739,0.050998833,0.15125655,0.0033919364,0.00005556712,0.000059019487,0.00018332699,0.7241247],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9560916,0.005416017,0.003973671,0.008074065,0.0025692454,0.00007368694,0.00002359594,0.00012208226,0.023656067],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9915978,0.006175729,0.00016670462,0.0004260806,0.0012448172,0.00038881676],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9821014,0.014351443,0.0008432242,0.00088743266,0.0013808324,0.00043575116],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007959461,0.00047782128,0.0006279273,0.0032470063,0.0065077986,0.010600498,0.0007507403,0.0036425223,0.0055396105],"category_scores_gemma":[0.014094418,0.00026641184,0.0004378853,0.0013933026,0.045517176,0.012542469,0.005253703,0.0062030526,0.0009207337],"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":[0.0000039093215,0.0000034398454,0.000020404417,0.0000173621,8.6993066e-7,0.000022105083,0.0028598916,0.000042496336,0.000023460023,0.994942,0.0008727977,0.0011913012],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000011348673,0.000013693028,0.000051947187,0.00018160578,0.000003835636,0.000059835165,0.0022731477,0.00027598612,0.000120919816,0.9447877,0.052213594,0.0000064241253],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0011073041,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0007486609,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010600498,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0045387656,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0028035427,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04209411},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2769221086","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.50.4.0566","title":"Replicating Reasons: Arguments, Memes, and the Cognitive Environment","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Language, Metaphor, and Cognition","field":"Psychology","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentative; Argumentation theory; Dialectic; Persuasion; Epistemology; Cognition; Memetics; Sociology; Psychology; Cognitive science; Social psychology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.031891469611813585,"score_gpt":0.2912759381567086,"score_spread":0.259384468544895,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2769221086","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":[0.50600433,0.009022282,0.21257952,0.043819,0.0011212969,0.00015314741,0.00013031758,0.00047752957,0.22669254],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9844567,0.00045347016,0.012628009,0.00045048434,0.00008769918,0.000030148407,0.000018098199,0.000044865723,0.0018305364],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9909903,0.0073901773,0.0001690809,0.00046890948,0.0007767714,0.00020477608],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9666885,0.027700445,0.0021332575,0.0016999856,0.0011902361,0.00058755896],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008942759,0.0005154047,0.00046338784,0.0022287618,0.0024591826,0.008405114,0.0013386683,0.0032861037,0.004414883],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03794684,0.00043627698,0.00043011282,0.0010676084,0.020499963,0.014393027,0.0045591746,0.002702871,0.0004968562],"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":[0.000090137255,0.0000569726,0.0019437987,0.0002495167,0.00004464229,0.000787507,0.06407124,0.0008182629,0.0019593674,0.9098018,0.0016947761,0.018482028],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004067711,0.00007006866,0.0015102705,0.00029893377,0.000032167907,0.0006623009,0.022569915,0.0031736325,0.0014323193,0.93024945,0.039917465,0.00004290537],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00026120627,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00026467227,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.008942759,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0013588106,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00083974435,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04729438},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2891414723","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.51.3.0269","title":"Designing Soundscapes for Argumentation","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Rhetoric and Communication Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":14,"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":"Argumentation theory; Soundscape; Argumentative; Conviction; Context (archaeology); Normative; Epistemology; Sound (geography); Sociology; Political science; Law; Philosophy; History; Acoustics","score_opus":0.08313284929350859,"score_gpt":0.2801152351405932,"score_spread":0.19698238584708463,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2891414723","genre_codex":"methods","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":[0.17789102,0.001183169,0.5899575,0.006717456,0.00084345374,0.0015858965,0.00040030805,0.0059592477,0.21546201],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.78499955,0.000306349,0.19696221,0.0008167394,0.00013705224,0.0012664936,0.00022262435,0.0005160932,0.0147728985],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99103034,0.0065096505,0.0002903586,0.00051582156,0.0012262245,0.00042761106],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96209353,0.028840307,0.0013191147,0.0032855303,0.0032305236,0.001230978],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010424637,0.0011004275,0.00042850286,0.0022957767,0.0032653084,0.009210906,0.0019217316,0.0031238622,0.01852268],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0329552,0.00049965695,0.0006455843,0.00084365666,0.007451666,0.0070390124,0.0065720305,0.0017515861,0.0025506685],"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":[0.00076021993,0.00065959763,0.0049568946,0.0029359208,0.00012244195,0.0025030752,0.10817271,0.0127884215,0.054289673,0.49375826,0.022810657,0.2962421],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00031514652,0.0009933766,0.004249154,0.0021983052,0.0001345804,0.0011250336,0.053300533,0.03246053,0.028807923,0.2964169,0.57969993,0.0002985008],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008793498,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0012028385,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01852268,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0017519122,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0012676464,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.061964512},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2939457100","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.52.1.0078","title":"<i>Combat–Débat</i>: Parataxis and the Unavowable Community; or, The Joke","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"French Literature and Criticism","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Joke; Trope (literature); Politics; Identity (music); Presidency; Alterity; Sociology; Subordination (linguistics); Philosophy; Epistemology; Literature; Aesthetics; Law; Political science; Linguistics; Art","score_opus":0.0282866409356068,"score_gpt":0.21241716224193335,"score_spread":0.18413052130632657,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2939457100","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":[0.022531576,0.044565942,0.008514316,0.24038574,0.006471389,0.000029531655,0.000097298034,0.00033631318,0.6770678],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8308596,0.0054120435,0.0016115927,0.017512055,0.003267125,0.00004555227,0.000032577533,0.0003185605,0.14094083],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9977229,0.0015484557,0.00002435232,0.00019880157,0.00032548016,0.00017985198],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977423,0.0014637025,0.00015867045,0.00016688586,0.00033430487,0.00013407752],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0019705915,0.00044375175,0.00027619637,0.0012569723,0.008472459,0.0077814674,0.00069260574,0.002655982,0.0065492103],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004098409,0.00013770741,0.000228873,0.00075638853,0.022038678,0.0045495657,0.001487722,0.0040808134,0.0012196492],"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":[0.00002067132,0.0000060050925,0.00011124705,0.00005254438,0.0000041948138,0.00011082318,0.026268946,0.00006131073,0.00019482376,0.89831537,0.067701355,0.007152666],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000005657058,0.000019848325,0.0005373898,0.00025405613,0.0000055204764,0.0002459355,0.018161587,0.00021710913,0.00041476745,0.06736282,0.9127567,0.000018577686],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03454277,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.037158716,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03454277,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009834201,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0022635434,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07135242},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3037169852","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.53.3.0299","title":"The Suicidal State: In Advance of an American Requiem","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Race, Genetics, and Society","field":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","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":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Biopower; Racism; State of exception; Writ; State (computer science); Criminology; Context (archaeology); Biosocial theory; Sociology; Racialization; Political science; Race (biology); Gender studies; Politics; Law; Psychoanalysis; History; Psychology","score_opus":0.01224720338316971,"score_gpt":0.2551643427118993,"score_spread":0.2429171393287296,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3037169852","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":[0.058673307,0.0058574975,0.0015811541,0.62653583,0.019307744,0.000027740696,0.000031365333,0.00007709651,0.28790832],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.75276875,0.0026247997,0.00076645945,0.15587543,0.0030969107,0.00003775518,0.000027213466,0.00007668144,0.084726065],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.998271,0.0008861514,0.000045335,0.00016519906,0.0003092099,0.0003230806],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981312,0.000786778,0.0001392714,0.000089656896,0.00039973416,0.00045350342],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003132204,0.00026027675,0.000275387,0.00050692743,0.01685847,0.005338972,0.0006335827,0.004791205,0.0034245849],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0068911323,0.00020173915,0.00020998639,0.0003722684,0.014864976,0.0044731703,0.004277272,0.016076265,0.0006963753],"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":[0.000042807602,0.000051737567,0.0009747288,0.000049212176,0.000005528503,0.0008012748,0.17698142,0.000044386372,0.00044620593,0.62623733,0.17408365,0.020281855],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000007750419,0.000032236672,0.0007871622,0.0002473198,0.00000916684,0.00036815106,0.09463192,0.00012805479,0.00035053986,0.042538304,0.8608754,0.000023870809],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009691162,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.022571374,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01685847,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0047052964,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0056045726,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.034139454},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3038055792","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.53.3.0326","title":"The Moral Sense in the Time of the Recluse","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Recluse; Rhetoric; Darwin (ADL); Environmental ethics; Reflection (computer programming); Epistemology; Sociology; Philosophy; Aesthetics; Theology; Linguistics; Poetry","score_opus":0.06630831190702248,"score_gpt":0.2260373133054254,"score_spread":0.1597290013984029,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3038055792","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":[0.05742527,0.014110521,0.01844959,0.44677612,0.010176482,0.000039803854,0.00006886422,0.00012707071,0.45282635],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9714035,0.0010369443,0.0011892477,0.012740223,0.00102429,0.000022803064,0.000010763416,0.0000738265,0.012498489],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9875937,0.009400059,0.0002445938,0.0006177,0.0014103599,0.00073345995],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98540986,0.00957189,0.0010852617,0.0008116055,0.0021163635,0.0010049549],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.012249667,0.00035782397,0.00049609906,0.0013062336,0.009674843,0.011227323,0.0011707057,0.0056910557,0.0036608777],"category_scores_gemma":[0.023177518,0.00029146564,0.00030963126,0.0007691002,0.092549674,0.013177542,0.0056883907,0.013164156,0.0005291137],"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":[0.000014898651,0.0000061098594,0.00010561729,0.000025830157,0.0000031470931,0.000106110885,0.042366005,0.000049680595,0.00008296862,0.94756585,0.007850817,0.001822988],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000018993333,0.000035204415,0.0003038003,0.00043330906,0.000010130338,0.0002553648,0.060742363,0.00028601274,0.00034694668,0.6741311,0.26339877,0.000038009985],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0030926513,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0026718557,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.012249667,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007271818,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0037381148,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.064783216},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3144331134","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.48.1.0026","title":"Classifying the Patterns of Natural Arguments","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":39,"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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Argument (complex analysis); Epistemology; Abstraction; Dialectic; Natural (archaeology); Rhetorical question; Representation (politics); Computer science; Argument map; Artificial intelligence; Philosophy; Linguistics; Political science","score_opus":0.061922752016709444,"score_gpt":0.26467909075392243,"score_spread":0.202756338737213,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3144331134","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":[0.58533466,0.001193286,0.34305015,0.0038926003,0.0001681899,0.0006148248,0.0010083828,0.0006144332,0.0641235],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.90025145,0.00017396292,0.09648715,0.000102237,0.000031484684,0.00021583223,0.00059013435,0.00007196428,0.0020759094],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9900737,0.005124864,0.0010167216,0.001047185,0.0022114122,0.00052614027],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9757343,0.012863671,0.0032867887,0.004164953,0.0033440255,0.0006064139],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0048479554,0.0003372914,0.00049064803,0.0076977042,0.0018993648,0.007108726,0.001205155,0.001633841,0.0032142894],"category_scores_gemma":[0.030899528,0.0003469121,0.00056097214,0.0054603983,0.0060844617,0.006177271,0.0028514306,0.0013620757,0.0006123821],"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":[0.0003034176,0.00014553721,0.04177199,0.00047335052,0.00008367484,0.0005486455,0.021637073,0.0016738998,0.0076125697,0.8179829,0.0031442966,0.10462262],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000049142556,0.0001415298,0.03091656,0.00045437977,0.00008483738,0.001132136,0.016291605,0.030812293,0.00544585,0.86021334,0.05439202,0.000066379],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009628958,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011720133,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0076977042,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0015338222,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0011010823,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.02563876},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3176353597","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.54.2.0109","title":"Fooling the Victim: Of Straw Men and Those Who Fall for Them","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":10,"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 Lethbridge","funders":"","keywords":"Fallacy; Argument (complex analysis); Argumentation theory; Adversarial system; Epistemology; Subject (documents); Philosophy; Law and economics; Social psychology; Sociology; Law; Political science; Psychology; Computer science; Medicine","score_opus":0.12006824338450683,"score_gpt":0.2821851329781331,"score_spread":0.16211688959362625,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3176353597","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":[0.21406871,0.011809442,0.054644015,0.22773829,0.004526949,0.00013982007,0.000047638165,0.00017814832,0.48684704],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96406186,0.001016732,0.0017665239,0.0103528835,0.00055187003,0.000036473266,0.000010998989,0.00012568939,0.022076853],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9812858,0.013834474,0.00029452457,0.0012334136,0.0018948185,0.0014569662],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9826806,0.012076472,0.001517929,0.0011748074,0.0015031367,0.0010470714],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01845396,0.00074880855,0.0011522745,0.002032622,0.019124426,0.012674904,0.002088801,0.011179312,0.008728382],"category_scores_gemma":[0.036296967,0.000615322,0.0004998901,0.0011739016,0.065731384,0.019617405,0.00960687,0.012474916,0.0017758893],"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":[0.000033232398,0.00002198485,0.00072896015,0.000058586807,0.000016897216,0.00070262305,0.16495244,0.000056797653,0.00020185468,0.8174162,0.008949734,0.006860612],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000019283605,0.00005549943,0.0006836642,0.0008911281,0.00003231941,0.0011147974,0.2150646,0.0005943064,0.000981179,0.4853913,0.29511636,0.000055554818],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0020600292,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0023568426,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.019124426,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004326171,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002950125,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.097595036},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4224075577","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0066","title":"Mind the Gap: <i>Kairos</i> in the Spaces of Silence","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Narrative Theory and Analysis","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":2,"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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Kairos; Silence; Order (exchange); Moment (physics); Epistemology; Aesthetics; Sociology; Philosophy; Physics","score_opus":0.047944730514601894,"score_gpt":0.23247748433427445,"score_spread":0.18453275381967255,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4224075577","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":[0.13396783,0.012378755,0.05727163,0.055880062,0.0020726668,0.00013026393,0.00013528018,0.0003773977,0.7377862],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9831004,0.0011842874,0.002232901,0.0015417504,0.00021031169,0.00006267336,0.000022741144,0.00008916919,0.011555698],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9952537,0.003393806,0.0001256334,0.00031714267,0.00052886124,0.00038086384],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99318105,0.004243043,0.00068209204,0.00081240956,0.0007160999,0.0003653543],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0052966867,0.0003912926,0.00039833479,0.0013799953,0.006797248,0.011296948,0.0011538579,0.0021150562,0.0036384559],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011562263,0.00035800753,0.00038657422,0.0012670942,0.03985492,0.015942477,0.005891848,0.004000833,0.0007698279],"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":[0.00004563115,0.000009146305,0.00024630144,0.00009133417,0.0000056019917,0.00018290289,0.1475186,0.000078369034,0.00037922474,0.84176075,0.0033747933,0.0063073104],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000025845044,0.000059000948,0.00092841755,0.00076703436,0.000029632478,0.000704242,0.24200879,0.00077147095,0.001389632,0.48152518,0.27172238,0.00006827202],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0030178549,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00302512,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.011296948,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0030881853,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0027463173,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.028011918},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4243244020","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.48.2.0233","title":"Rhetorical Citizenship and Public Deliberation","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Rhetoric and Communication Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":18,"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":"Deliberation; Rhetorical question; Rhetoric; Deliberative democracy; Politics; Democracy; Sociology; Epistemology; Political science; Law; Philosophy; Theology; Linguistics","score_opus":0.21426168424387784,"score_gpt":0.2766817939204269,"score_spread":0.06242010967654907,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4243244020","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":[0.10572476,0.016307652,0.06356934,0.078140795,0.00079364335,0.000103080696,0.00008384766,0.0002329804,0.73504394],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9835381,0.0013625212,0.0045565306,0.002078302,0.00037080722,0.00007557,0.0000385536,0.00006577819,0.007913828],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9731319,0.018752923,0.00077424396,0.002214958,0.003600691,0.0015252827],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97189134,0.021296883,0.0026266887,0.0017722407,0.001674864,0.0007379578],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.020273061,0.0005022161,0.00064604013,0.0033637595,0.005871138,0.012545872,0.0012403646,0.0045837006,0.0045311837],"category_scores_gemma":[0.024807444,0.00040611485,0.0007403508,0.002314493,0.041877076,0.012718504,0.0088549685,0.004832697,0.0008316602],"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":[0.000012881535,0.00001413038,0.0002668685,0.000039777224,0.0000075257594,0.000047332134,0.010183595,0.0002199515,0.00010420476,0.981938,0.0010791329,0.006086545],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001983931,0.000014989985,0.00030230527,0.00009977569,0.000006658087,0.00006523112,0.0025798278,0.00031902106,0.00026353987,0.96138567,0.034931254,0.000011840404],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0010634926,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00066607323,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.020273061,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0044195177,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0033628661,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.107215464},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4321509394","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.55.4.0386","title":"The Erotic Madness of Writing in Plato’s <i>Phaedrus</i>","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Classical Philosophy and Thought","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"Mount Saint Vincent University","funders":"","keywords":"SOCRATES; Analogy; Possessive; Literature; Philosophy; Function (biology); Orientation (vector space); Linguistics; Epistemology; Art; Mathematics","score_opus":0.029647640735188517,"score_gpt":0.21632852359484486,"score_spread":0.18668088285965634,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4321509394","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":[0.11717098,0.0046626176,0.020935766,0.026798146,0.0012602017,0.000034133605,0.00005504476,0.00015063872,0.8289324],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98799753,0.00039039287,0.0009872627,0.0006527129,0.00025221673,0.000012228415,0.000008202515,0.00004103241,0.009658438],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9972682,0.0018913085,0.00007898924,0.00023258978,0.0003513178,0.0001777041],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973918,0.0016158515,0.0003035357,0.00032262926,0.00020823836,0.00015791573],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0027554817,0.0002821637,0.00025180206,0.00093345117,0.006041603,0.007297712,0.00040221924,0.0011189891,0.0020688628],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003601621,0.00022116466,0.00016658651,0.00063042005,0.04987834,0.0054253275,0.0034068967,0.0039863368,0.0002998212],"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":[0.00001776436,0.000007491164,0.0001537821,0.000025733927,0.0000016937855,0.00015411242,0.047368854,0.000069307156,0.0002062205,0.94666374,0.0020977969,0.0032335145],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000027373982,0.000051848296,0.00092669437,0.00022460613,0.000010996553,0.00072644243,0.026328744,0.0009679958,0.0013453114,0.7017384,0.26762137,0.000030144336],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0016806057,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0013947263,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.007297712,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0026149587,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001313211,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.018972933},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4385464282","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.56.2.0199","title":"Violent Inheritance: Sexuality, Land, and Energy in Making the North American West","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Latin American and Latino Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":44,"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":"Rhetoric; Human sexuality; Sociology; Queer; Aesthetics; Inheritance (genetic algorithm); Suspect; Materialism; Gender studies; Epistemology; Criminology; Philosophy","score_opus":0.03952458556388738,"score_gpt":0.3133172136242772,"score_spread":0.27379262806038984,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4385464282","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":[0.22191767,0.07002061,0.0029800255,0.117206,0.0019528785,0.00003494035,0.000033084136,0.000050608374,0.58580416],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.92766947,0.015590951,0.0010661224,0.0055792355,0.0002505928,0.000024709729,0.000010303338,0.000033484015,0.049775105],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99896765,0.0007280438,0.000012647192,0.000041382027,0.00014465277,0.00010559877],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994474,0.00038886588,0.000048156653,0.00002315121,0.00003814402,0.000054328324],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011135384,0.00018110561,0.00021704285,0.0005159513,0.00841997,0.004847192,0.00052248,0.00097148906,0.0023665314],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001148588,0.00013348745,0.00009590321,0.00075019064,0.016966937,0.0034491331,0.0016788288,0.002407561,0.00016495987],"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":[0.00001227266,0.000023137904,0.0010899495,0.000076676406,0.0000038021901,0.0003173836,0.37161025,0.00005255463,0.0001809439,0.57248306,0.024773141,0.029376827],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000049613805,0.000023319022,0.0037054932,0.00050275534,0.000007753385,0.00038675047,0.4049365,0.00014963359,0.0003047907,0.09180254,0.49815717,0.000018366538],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.032052997,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.10878869,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.032052997,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0033099928,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0027517893,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4392845246","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.56.3-4.0274","title":"<i>Kairos</i> , The Sire of Beauty","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Classical Philosophy and Thought","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Kairos; Beauty; Rhetoric; Harmony (color); Aesthetics; Philosophy; Epistemology; Intuition; Antinomy; Art; Theology; Visual arts","score_opus":0.05204658885694838,"score_gpt":0.22983400423240308,"score_spread":0.1777874153754547,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4392845246","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":[0.037457284,0.011525403,0.012932475,0.03905501,0.004740447,0.000044689703,0.00017441333,0.00023294853,0.89383733],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.90085715,0.0033817498,0.0024409199,0.0039361366,0.00142059,0.000036349833,0.00005905745,0.00017905021,0.08768903],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992467,0.0003694821,0.00002642412,0.000104091654,0.00018915895,0.00006409342],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990507,0.0005332984,0.000104358856,0.00009062325,0.00015872208,0.00006234715],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012068639,0.000289323,0.00023866977,0.00092752057,0.0031119995,0.0041684583,0.00045416938,0.0010043269,0.005934652],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002651246,0.00015174612,0.00020894383,0.0006822564,0.013738056,0.0041594384,0.002022952,0.0031258722,0.001096023],"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":[0.000046691177,0.000008127309,0.00025404093,0.00013758446,0.000005957157,0.00020112951,0.02905292,0.00009416283,0.0007918405,0.9384147,0.022466699,0.008526148],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001365637,0.000059445552,0.0015637127,0.00046202677,0.000018464158,0.0012514164,0.027572112,0.0004917865,0.0017260135,0.18646854,0.7803309,0.000041919255],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002693448,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0036902768,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.005934652,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0018623911,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009627366,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.019853413},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4400580755","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.57.1.0030","title":"Figuring the Topos: Finding Common Ground in Cognitive Environments","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Narrative Theory and Analysis","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Topos theory; Figuring; Common ground; Cognition; Computer science; Mathematics; Physics; Art; Psychology; Communication; Astronomy; Literature","score_opus":0.05827019360311416,"score_gpt":0.2696944171496502,"score_spread":0.21142422354653603,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4400580755","genre_codex":"methods","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":[0.27525154,0.0012898492,0.56625324,0.010071394,0.00039337296,0.00033706293,0.00011810545,0.0006559008,0.1456296],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9503855,0.00016109268,0.046737358,0.00015676513,0.0000365343,0.00008812818,0.000043163232,0.000096961994,0.0022945586],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.976665,0.017885802,0.00063006015,0.0016982584,0.0022630815,0.00085770217],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97381556,0.017505374,0.0023308308,0.003547598,0.0016131804,0.0011874344],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.013060929,0.00065843726,0.00065162993,0.0051948754,0.007835438,0.015424009,0.0021949124,0.0028728123,0.004775005],"category_scores_gemma":[0.029452123,0.00067469897,0.000858881,0.002850148,0.04036605,0.0219411,0.015758943,0.0028963182,0.00061347743],"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":[0.00006656016,0.00004296242,0.0012681901,0.00016007142,0.000024646573,0.0011227654,0.2393358,0.0009866874,0.0015187463,0.73160493,0.0011246423,0.022743903],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000031972177,0.00009191761,0.0011116934,0.0004614176,0.000035423673,0.0007650587,0.18631448,0.0069861864,0.00220197,0.7333443,0.06859298,0.00006264728],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0013472474,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011558221,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.015424009,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0026210195,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0027062215,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06907362},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4400580875","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.57.1.0103","title":"<i>Logos</i> in the Flux of Life","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy","field":"Psychology","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Logos Bible Software; Flux (metallurgy); Philosophy; Chemistry; Theology","score_opus":0.041140674694320256,"score_gpt":0.29568973838473794,"score_spread":0.2545490636904177,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4400580875","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":[0.073410064,0.011917502,0.017271897,0.10386656,0.0018452608,0.000041458563,0.00012146586,0.00018562374,0.7913402],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97928244,0.0019616676,0.0013173015,0.002625696,0.00046067988,0.000037623646,0.000032654276,0.00006654608,0.014215376],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9979741,0.0015614913,0.00002977194,0.00013275625,0.0001874997,0.00011437223],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99828136,0.0010392145,0.00019903181,0.00017661735,0.00016792589,0.00013594308],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021341182,0.0002482734,0.00028500147,0.0014643805,0.0056635113,0.008120403,0.00058137585,0.0017002474,0.0050846664],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0025095958,0.0001546781,0.00016711712,0.0013626477,0.043675266,0.009574554,0.0029951972,0.0037777636,0.0004970718],"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":[0.000012659,0.0000068536806,0.0001555897,0.000028369705,0.0000013535861,0.00005823351,0.02101339,0.000041125888,0.0001340262,0.9729873,0.003670893,0.0018902328],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000012774512,0.000023013887,0.0006913925,0.0003461208,0.0000060751104,0.00021803881,0.046137672,0.00034432733,0.0002974649,0.6350147,0.31689066,0.000017820867],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0020822673,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019867746,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.008120403,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004356519,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0016274096,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.03160888},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4405234122","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.57.3.0333","title":"Sophisms and Contempt for Autonomy","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics","field":"Arts and Humanities","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 Lethbridge","funders":"","keywords":"Contempt; Autonomy; Philosophy; Political science; Law and economics; Sociology; Law","score_opus":0.09365532945548626,"score_gpt":0.2821873199907969,"score_spread":0.1885319905353106,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4405234122","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":[0.14331174,0.0013509174,0.094471924,0.046752825,0.0010005984,0.000097422846,0.000057601686,0.00017425383,0.7127827],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9921217,0.00013158435,0.003189728,0.0009379683,0.00011676399,0.000026052749,0.000008720338,0.00002411292,0.0034434854],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98804283,0.00856646,0.00038044062,0.0008913211,0.0015594822,0.00055944355],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98587704,0.009680732,0.0008920919,0.0012393333,0.0016160486,0.0006946771],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010154084,0.00033889187,0.00041744843,0.0010961327,0.0029532167,0.0041818605,0.0005027391,0.0024863263,0.0033361681],"category_scores_gemma":[0.018596768,0.00021560788,0.0006635244,0.00036543407,0.024218272,0.0073046763,0.0039497362,0.0038455676,0.00038757164],"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":[0.00001107674,0.000005338777,0.00020845115,0.000017358914,0.000003331764,0.00006457165,0.0026106914,0.00011257296,0.00013821194,0.9946419,0.00064832135,0.0015380709],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000007936327,0.000014089326,0.00029112512,0.00004502844,0.000005686753,0.00006507704,0.0008740636,0.00067514775,0.00019819751,0.98716146,0.010655101,0.000007125532],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00073908083,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0006517038,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010154084,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003081777,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001644016,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.053700566},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4405234222","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.57.3.0270","title":"Autonomy and Argumentation: An Introduction","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","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 Lethbridge","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Autonomy; Epistemology; Philosophy; Sociology; Political science; Law","score_opus":0.04752464318364486,"score_gpt":0.34201969988472425,"score_spread":0.2944950567010794,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4405234222","genre_codex":"review","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":[0.004976502,0.5105439,0.056577537,0.07018309,0.009944138,0.00016119554,0.00026680034,0.00014797805,0.3471989],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.3496452,0.4665178,0.04762695,0.025072515,0.038540922,0.0010128941,0.00066306297,0.0003284969,0.07059215],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9972746,0.0016295023,0.00013869995,0.00030886094,0.00047991076,0.00016836479],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9940502,0.0048773764,0.00017764141,0.00016149956,0.0005118071,0.0002214087],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003022383,0.0010400317,0.0012711388,0.0042313826,0.0027544063,0.0077778636,0.0013621574,0.0061814585,0.009301392],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0051991576,0.00060484256,0.0009623569,0.004085287,0.011141823,0.009327247,0.0036053085,0.007480464,0.0019223355],"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":[0.000014068858,0.000039542487,0.00016437178,0.00040704393,0.000010756222,0.00012838257,0.0018928795,0.0005697662,0.00013019679,0.9622018,0.015207755,0.019233515],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000011272846,0.00003404501,0.00033344122,0.0015894138,0.0000074934314,0.00024131121,0.0007587498,0.00073733105,0.000053995584,0.6611396,0.33507466,0.000018645094],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0019082461,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009572885,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009301392,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0034717415,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0018937988,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.031116247},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4408997826","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0076","title":"Silence at the Meta-Level: A Story about Argumentative Cruelty","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies","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":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Lethbridge","funders":"","keywords":"Cruelty; Silence; Argumentative; Philosophy; Literature; Epistemology; Political science; Aesthetics; Law; Art","score_opus":0.14589058305593364,"score_gpt":0.33818403822338533,"score_spread":0.1922934551674517,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4408997826","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":[0.18348753,0.008302721,0.06879475,0.5334789,0.003565498,0.00019073818,0.00017099347,0.00033810164,0.20167077],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9767462,0.0009033523,0.002845813,0.01242257,0.0007811342,0.00013621098,0.000029550598,0.00018165802,0.0059534125],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.95694876,0.036102466,0.0007361251,0.0015616841,0.0030351656,0.0016158537],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8795936,0.10764938,0.003447663,0.0036207293,0.003909668,0.0017789571],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.041206982,0.0013191315,0.001382469,0.0029825128,0.021070741,0.014328636,0.004214379,0.018418135,0.0038783187],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07681909,0.0009414698,0.0018141598,0.001731627,0.069592886,0.028030181,0.0127942655,0.031731192,0.0009380861],"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":[0.00008371783,0.000024374966,0.00027582538,0.000107803295,0.000021760388,0.0016919854,0.50510836,0.00019282673,0.0007578929,0.48453784,0.0040777805,0.0031198456],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000874264,0.00013910075,0.00066711777,0.001381877,0.00006750829,0.0018164275,0.30995476,0.0031130984,0.003584641,0.45502707,0.22403336,0.00012756497],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0043598935,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0025318288,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.041206982,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.011871392,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00317652,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21792597},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4414466736","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.58.1.0069","title":"Normative Pluralism and the Other","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Hannah Arendt's Political Philosophy","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":"University of Lethbridge","funders":"","keywords":"Normative; Perspective (graphical); Pluralism (philosophy); Modal; Ethical theories","score_opus":0.02072143016879495,"score_gpt":0.30665984885294684,"score_spread":0.2859384186841519,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4414466736","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":[0.021956073,0.0037493324,0.02657975,0.05845358,0.00078789593,0.00004301829,0.000033407665,0.000060745693,0.88833624],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97653234,0.0007142905,0.0032939895,0.0030326631,0.0004852918,0.000064208514,0.000021289865,0.000057313493,0.015798563],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9795857,0.014302026,0.0004419911,0.0021956505,0.002652339,0.0008222437],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99017566,0.0056615174,0.00067481707,0.0012701326,0.0013699252,0.0008479397],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014819572,0.0005650405,0.0008383404,0.00229643,0.00982183,0.010530592,0.0013448597,0.004257901,0.0052371398],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011618819,0.0003575786,0.0006174945,0.001383068,0.07613489,0.011845232,0.008110515,0.008303488,0.0005510256],"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":[0.0000017496573,0.0000024298004,0.000022940048,0.000007629409,0.0000011240228,0.000013031142,0.0018066502,0.00002742223,0.000017081806,0.997311,0.0003771314,0.00041180386],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000064568535,0.0000042224665,0.000047399666,0.000059973787,0.000002704673,0.0000295493,0.001806496,0.00017714825,0.00006242696,0.9724762,0.02532261,0.000004860446],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0027834054,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0025299017,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.014819572,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008648151,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004456701,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.078374326},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7128779945","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.58.2.0258","title":"The Intellectual and Cultural Origins of Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca’s New Rhetoric Project: Commentaries on and Translations of Seven Foundational Articles, 1933–1958","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Rhetoric and Communication Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Rhetoric; Rhetorical question; Argumentation theory; Argument (complex analysis); Audience measurement; Craft","score_opus":0.08286538395446588,"score_gpt":0.29377401866135644,"score_spread":0.21090863470689056,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7128779945","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":[0.09910377,0.071488194,0.0038883472,0.4908877,0.026262835,0.0000810984,0.00041296237,0.00018168447,0.3076934],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.89777267,0.008967862,0.0008352971,0.021921653,0.010337892,0.00013481353,0.0001291129,0.0005504471,0.05935042],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99126476,0.0042206096,0.00022694578,0.00081474293,0.002605947,0.000866935],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9698192,0.022099992,0.0018489896,0.0010767955,0.004003534,0.0011515354],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008532487,0.0008823911,0.00056545,0.0028129742,0.015794046,0.013156458,0.0013068196,0.006000896,0.0021401797],"category_scores_gemma":[0.029358843,0.00057028065,0.00027506216,0.0029130813,0.02482047,0.006279345,0.0043564155,0.013906041,0.00074078795],"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":[0.00011096036,0.00003559127,0.00054301973,0.00018511417,0.00002070913,0.0008394948,0.2749441,0.00012486511,0.000620279,0.39512938,0.31561625,0.011830223],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000018691413,0.000020143083,0.002046193,0.0007782495,0.000009713842,0.00027564476,0.039810784,0.00019196457,0.000934336,0.018634964,0.93722355,0.000055822053],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.023562267,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0275846,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.023562267,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.015167758,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00647826,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.11005032},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7128780135","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.58.2.0159","title":"Dialectic, Dialogue, and Difference","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Rhetoric and Communication Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Dialectic; Rhetoric; Ancient Greek; Western thought","score_opus":0.0415909414146712,"score_gpt":0.24640013927792512,"score_spread":0.2048091978632539,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7128780135","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":[0.061704896,0.049003467,0.046788998,0.09069976,0.0015266818,0.00008175827,0.00012091907,0.00010786206,0.7499658],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9792489,0.0035259929,0.00427798,0.0019388876,0.00042539442,0.00007371026,0.000032473352,0.00003214943,0.010444523],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9865568,0.011072296,0.0003022375,0.00073102844,0.0010192745,0.00031827186],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9878178,0.009982553,0.0005131648,0.0007853781,0.00058391877,0.0003171337],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008583469,0.00046829946,0.0005547106,0.0022220353,0.0050762524,0.010367368,0.000928906,0.0025027904,0.0053569837],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009583194,0.00018548183,0.00029361935,0.0022007602,0.054396376,0.009916184,0.0061636968,0.0042125564,0.0005439278],"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":[0.000008127379,0.0000054068096,0.00005824277,0.000032725307,0.0000022869583,0.000027890579,0.008939919,0.00006139174,0.000049218554,0.98730135,0.00089091173,0.0026225187],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000013706369,0.000011975299,0.00012761865,0.00014314981,0.0000027644103,0.000052680112,0.005688267,0.00019709267,0.00010228173,0.93536794,0.058286816,0.000005706324],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0012474367,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005953409,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010367368,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0054279296,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002444555,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0453943},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7163034977","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.58.3.0267","title":"Standing on a Bridge Between Cultures: Translation and Argumentation","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Discourse Analysis in Language Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Metaphor; Rhetorical question; Rhetoric; Argument (complex analysis); Bridge (graph theory); Bridging (networking); Perspective (graphical)","score_opus":0.06644373872172389,"score_gpt":0.31744889026988043,"score_spread":0.25100515154815656,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W7163034977","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":[0.4140742,0.013579404,0.119792596,0.07301465,0.0027928185,0.0004636791,0.00013730826,0.0002526513,0.37589264],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9849834,0.0015314961,0.008830605,0.0010001472,0.00020409482,0.00011634297,0.00003034082,0.000092312905,0.0032113015],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9059369,0.08461217,0.0018503161,0.0015792301,0.004879439,0.0011419576],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.83881617,0.14211899,0.0053458763,0.0055329315,0.0066039963,0.0015820129],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.04454815,0.00087934604,0.0009152051,0.004077315,0.0100876205,0.022470493,0.0022236395,0.005575744,0.0044941455],"category_scores_gemma":[0.07721218,0.00048064647,0.0006861074,0.00423034,0.039121907,0.017656999,0.013011382,0.0061013433,0.00078310963],"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":[0.0000799058,0.00007170269,0.0011607243,0.0006622223,0.00002771703,0.0014229239,0.6013436,0.000526391,0.0009967658,0.362656,0.002480218,0.028571906],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000055750326,0.00012594373,0.0016458916,0.0032989203,0.000052968164,0.001055748,0.46673778,0.005274161,0.00347327,0.38800785,0.13019045,0.00008124779],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009019305,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000761541,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04454815,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005820453,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0054752743,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.235596},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W89977932","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.46.4.0533","title":"The Role of Audience in Argumentation from the Perspective of Informal Logic","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Philosophy and Rhetoric","topic":"Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education","field":"Arts and Humanities","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Target audience; Perspective (graphical); Audience reception; Function (biology); Audience analysis; Audience participation; Epistemology; Sociology; Psychology; Computer science; Media studies; Advertising; Philosophy; Social science; Artificial intelligence","score_opus":0.0200355414744477,"score_gpt":0.2300781494553129,"score_spread":0.21004260798086521,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W89977932","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":[0.05273736,0.008324665,0.40603948,0.07413583,0.0011788063,0.00018037258,0.00007209565,0.00032173324,0.4570097],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96608657,0.001114302,0.02054085,0.0016768113,0.0006873578,0.00015679933,0.000019578181,0.00013775186,0.009580022],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.92208225,0.06875465,0.0012839347,0.0016823637,0.004620173,0.0015766362],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.92298,0.06565762,0.0029333178,0.0028163916,0.0040118843,0.0016008086],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.041978072,0.0010935856,0.0012480719,0.00453886,0.008825584,0.024272732,0.0025142042,0.008898325,0.0067221425],"category_scores_gemma":[0.038407225,0.000805993,0.0012818854,0.002187197,0.04876307,0.030372696,0.010447545,0.0092096925,0.00085278763],"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":[0.000011586043,0.0000075227927,0.00007541652,0.00004262635,0.0000054433663,0.000067595014,0.008534549,0.00024623476,0.00008837314,0.9891795,0.00033050374,0.0014107046],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000024813187,0.000016436246,0.00006735076,0.00016208756,0.0000121667035,0.00007849248,0.002609557,0.0015815315,0.00016037912,0.9793174,0.015957335,0.00001240725],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0013701943,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00083286635,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.041978072,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0058688372,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0032651408,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.22200394},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}