{"meta":{"query_hash":"12628e6bbb28","filters":{"venue":"Quarterly Journal of Speech"},"cohort_total":6,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":6,"exported":6,"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/12628e6bbb28","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Quarterly+Journal+of+Speech"},"results":[{"id":"W2005574439","doi":"10.1080/00335630500291521","title":"Whither Propaganda? Agonism and “The Engineering of Consent”","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":8,"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":"Agonism; Political science; Engineering ethics; Sociology; Law; Engineering","score_opus":0.010395613562509289,"score_gpt":0.2560756083630068,"score_spread":0.24567999480049751,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2005574439","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":[0.00419744,0.009796519,0.023565289,0.3488144,0.0041771578,0.00010088435,0.00011615538,0.0002547769,0.60897744],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.56464493,0.00876604,0.013619529,0.102717966,0.004785347,0.0005574588,0.00015251226,0.0007156398,0.3040406],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9839648,0.011319533,0.00039384005,0.001178034,0.002084433,0.0010593134],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98296434,0.012300923,0.000772964,0.002012596,0.0012782594,0.0006709475],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014232679,0.00074143347,0.0003632095,0.0012270333,0.0072622104,0.013129814,0.0015965224,0.007565507,0.032434683],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03989835,0.0004290692,0.0004536808,0.00084540615,0.037113722,0.017862888,0.005745674,0.009437738,0.006403363],"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":[0.000006224435,0.0000040391847,0.000041935178,0.00002689665,0.0000014942576,0.000039348644,0.0025448184,0.000036985784,0.00004572077,0.93153226,0.05801585,0.0077045728],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000013770268,0.000011812621,0.00012804789,0.00029038754,0.0000040679065,0.00011753441,0.0030573264,0.00021049692,0.0002584236,0.5105563,0.48533353,0.00001834603],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004362148,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004795804,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.032434683,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0052949814,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0044264547,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.10850477},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2154960524","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2011.609830","title":"Tropical Truth(s): The Epistemology of Metaphor and other Tropes","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","topic":"Global Maritime and Colonial Histories","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":11,"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; Philosophy; Epistemology; Sociology; Literature; Art; Linguistics","score_opus":0.028028445317286408,"score_gpt":0.2695315050434055,"score_spread":0.2415030597261191,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2154960524","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":[0.014191406,0.6439234,0.023632968,0.10120542,0.0034382718,0.000026577416,0.00017106072,0.00008945499,0.21332143],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6504581,0.30316645,0.0155753605,0.004515093,0.004828251,0.00011497684,0.00016148889,0.00013124396,0.021049114],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9985141,0.0010657994,0.000050286875,0.00009068599,0.00017484283,0.00010430281],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9960074,0.0032437253,0.00019587133,0.00015181952,0.00020655962,0.00019454953],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0034185445,0.0006347331,0.0009194139,0.0026729552,0.0033259792,0.008932669,0.0007284259,0.0024155073,0.005826038],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0054399767,0.00046484804,0.00054627255,0.0034406453,0.021388281,0.01894345,0.0029234153,0.0035858455,0.0008579664],"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":[0.000019344005,0.000014517118,0.00025230364,0.00026280602,0.000011726604,0.00017707562,0.019155802,0.00024632743,0.00013613382,0.91776764,0.032338507,0.02961781],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000079471965,0.00000903828,0.00055454933,0.0006557451,0.000008614301,0.00027629946,0.013002985,0.00040312344,0.00009697507,0.8751599,0.10980861,0.000016171824],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0046096686,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0071915984,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.008932669,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0029317203,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0029068221,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.02127117},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2165248973","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2011.585171","title":"Review Essay: Assessing Rhetorics of Social Resistance","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","topic":"Rhetoric and Communication Studies","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":8,"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; Rhetorical question; Griffin; Democracy; State (computer science); Social movement; Politics; Sociology; Public sphere; Media studies; Art history; Art; Political science; Classics; Law; Philosophy; Literature; Theology","score_opus":0.09695040382527086,"score_gpt":0.29854780232135103,"score_spread":0.20159739849608016,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2165248973","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.019599972,0.50954074,0.0049149096,0.17904207,0.065749206,0.0012932777,0.0028599694,0.00035241654,0.21664743],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.24091144,0.46279806,0.008765235,0.055327915,0.06066419,0.004083481,0.004652902,0.0007281976,0.16206855],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9920604,0.003220145,0.00042051065,0.0006381106,0.003442849,0.00021793223],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9222507,0.039156634,0.0063921157,0.0017155247,0.028245423,0.0022395551],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007964821,0.00070902583,0.000969994,0.006645219,0.0017225598,0.006632298,0.0011702263,0.0020471136,0.01818953],"category_scores_gemma":[0.09051954,0.00030998394,0.0005826692,0.0066525955,0.0013502036,0.0039003934,0.001619982,0.0016630429,0.008063722],"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":[0.00005895483,0.00005556476,0.001261194,0.0029200807,0.000070958835,0.00007792546,0.0015544858,0.00009691629,0.00033651423,0.0049884995,0.8364641,0.15211481],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003478418,0.00018624979,0.009597107,0.006500338,0.00012731437,0.00023290553,0.0042782826,0.00020762949,0.0002975443,0.0034622971,0.9750295,0.0000459223],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002363006,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0051397746,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01818953,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003303992,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005138931,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.060850024},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2560342508","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2017.1266213","title":"Kant and the Promise of Rhetoric","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","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 Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Rhetoric; Philosophy; Sociology; Epistemology; Linguistics","score_opus":0.020665981247692908,"score_gpt":0.22146315943528092,"score_spread":0.20079717818758802,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2560342508","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":[0.021256095,0.009165062,0.027520487,0.11401536,0.0015293285,0.000029183137,0.00010686554,0.00022918051,0.82614833],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9315025,0.0014297427,0.006669921,0.008391753,0.0013583474,0.00008267385,0.00003152727,0.0002243952,0.050309047],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99257505,0.0047578462,0.00019086456,0.00079885003,0.0011413713,0.00053600955],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9851281,0.011232171,0.0005740028,0.001638406,0.0009857288,0.00044159885],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008194611,0.00055001443,0.0005781926,0.0018178818,0.006407399,0.011435609,0.001256967,0.0069318237,0.010904132],"category_scores_gemma":[0.019231811,0.00059249985,0.0004486758,0.0010521701,0.046692524,0.018526126,0.004027645,0.00900459,0.0018493306],"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":[0.0000096686945,0.000003275633,0.000018344108,0.000010274737,0.0000012409812,0.000006858197,0.00084581424,0.00006138688,0.000038948492,0.99673647,0.001344014,0.0009235661],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000016221045,0.0000052281866,0.000044109653,0.000029357818,0.0000030750286,0.00001583971,0.0004133364,0.00023379669,0.00013346104,0.9684974,0.03059838,0.00000993352],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0020201027,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0019010928,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.011435609,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0052351924,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0020964136,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.043337762},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2602045680","doi":"","title":"Law, Rhetoric, and Irony in the Formation of Canadian Civil Culture by Michael Dorland and Maurice Charland","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","topic":"Canadian Identity and History","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Rhetoric; Irony; Sociology; Law; Philosophy; Political science; Art; Literature; Theology","score_opus":0.006863992282732792,"score_gpt":0.21138936321365132,"score_spread":0.20452537093091852,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2602045680","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":[0.032307014,0.049662743,0.0012812644,0.6227953,0.0027698586,0.000035375575,0.00018066018,0.0000664376,0.2909014],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8263854,0.028990237,0.0020259188,0.025761716,0.0022768893,0.000064778105,0.00010438412,0.00018244609,0.11420817],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99701524,0.0009456889,0.000070747716,0.00028670483,0.0009908034,0.00069092214],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.989813,0.0056178444,0.000399675,0.00023036015,0.0030345505,0.0009045141],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00469089,0.00069726416,0.0005587557,0.0036530837,0.03403454,0.015337158,0.0018430926,0.0048918286,0.006929556],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01431969,0.0005929976,0.00025442574,0.0042907703,0.03939792,0.0076248,0.0029635713,0.008133451,0.0005018478],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","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":[0.00004186453,0.00002864797,0.0009060513,0.00011257241,0.0000105099825,0.00013873767,0.055881843,0.0003686847,0.00012839054,0.72140545,0.1987939,0.022183424],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000019672478,0.000011575325,0.0035754892,0.00050832226,0.000024630732,0.000083775994,0.06061848,0.0005083634,0.00035945876,0.15714411,0.77703995,0.00010613908],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.95589703,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9732852,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09205062,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.09205062,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.094680555,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6678771},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4304806329","doi":"10.1080/00335630.2022.2128201","title":"Rhetorical economy: Affect, labor, and capital in transnational digital circulation","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Quarterly Journal of Speech","topic":"Elite Sociology and Global Capitalism","field":"Social 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 Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Rhetorical question; Rhetoric; Capitalism; Sociology; Context (archaeology); Value (mathematics); Capital (architecture); Affect (linguistics); Political economy; Economics; Political science; History; Linguistics; Law","score_opus":0.012640723581264458,"score_gpt":0.2801224525385109,"score_spread":0.2674817289572465,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4304806329","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":[0.5675947,0.0039085466,0.03218362,0.0276634,0.00036421185,0.0000690562,0.00013546347,0.00012874848,0.3679523],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9954053,0.00034520662,0.0010957788,0.0002740866,0.00010660821,0.000023671731,0.000014239949,0.000020129943,0.0027150894],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9983558,0.0009598822,0.00005834185,0.00015096588,0.00031795164,0.00015704181],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.992473,0.005494026,0.0008270256,0.000505112,0.00037358,0.00032729824],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0034674578,0.00030201132,0.00025440005,0.0029140979,0.0030512286,0.010144283,0.0005617801,0.0013531073,0.004638208],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009402281,0.00022651535,0.00024596349,0.0020561658,0.017080963,0.012365142,0.003775537,0.0015594221,0.00029605278],"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":[0.000050977604,0.000038995488,0.005434296,0.0001000862,0.00001153496,0.0003274171,0.048509084,0.00059276406,0.00085201836,0.92034984,0.0011901705,0.02254286],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000048596234,0.00011643142,0.023618225,0.0005998099,0.000057379308,0.0006138868,0.08505728,0.008351285,0.002965443,0.7704726,0.108032696,0.00006640899],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0018890909,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001612526,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.010144283,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003862916,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001957099,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.028027534},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}