{"meta":{"query_hash":"d0a910580b15","filters":{"venue":"Ratio Juris"},"cohort_total":28,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":28,"exported":28,"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/d0a910580b15","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Ratio+Juris"},"results":[{"id":"W1497418157","doi":"10.1111/raju.12068","title":"Political Equality by Precedent","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","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 Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Entitlement (fair division); Constructive; Politics; Law and economics; Begging; Sociology; Inequality; Property (philosophy); Law; Political science; Economics; Epistemology; Mathematical economics; Philosophy; Mathematics; Computer science","score_opus":0.14551455825994997,"score_gpt":0.4144367432656803,"score_spread":0.26892218500573034,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1497418157","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.012313311,0.00006812936,0.0011243506,0.05881525,0.0003323227,0.00010521235,0.000029020724,0.000098385804,0.927114],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9938142,0.000002979597,0.000095881565,0.0022905192,0.0006536759,0.0000065510662,0.0000068292975,0.0000044652347,0.0031249016],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9985696,0.00030668054,0.00013992611,0.00012936362,0.00044285157,0.00041158337],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989758,0.00017513517,0.000020220183,0.00012265287,0.00010149279,0.00060467876],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009510209,0.00005836953,0.000088477944,0.000012813865,0.00020415502,0.000064908505,0.00014426258,0.00013341756,0.00009958665],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0011306362,0.000055942586,0.00003644645,0.00008490639,0.00035252742,0.00015895432,0.000028383383,0.0001553862,0.0002859229],"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":[0.0000037244613,0.00004115169,0.00022116516,0.0000020475613,0.000003991784,5.2908683e-7,0.0025580705,1.8905926e-7,0.000012968415,0.97492874,0.022152817,0.000074584226],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00012984562,0.000031884247,0.00012792546,0.000002743918,0.000007811506,2.0976182e-7,0.001084107,0.000016301265,0.00048526583,0.7078416,0.29017124,0.00010108983],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00317054,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00027408273,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.98150086,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00017350531,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00035244244,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.47929296},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1515411761","doi":"10.1111/raju.12070","title":"Beyond the Law‐State: The Adequacy of <scp>R</scp>az's Account of Legal Systems in Explaining Intra‐State and Supra‐State Legality","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":13,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"McMaster University","funders":"","keywords":"Principle of legality; State (computer science); Citation; Law; Sociology; Library science; Political science; Computer science; Algorithm","score_opus":0.03164222571396745,"score_gpt":0.28802232252137794,"score_spread":0.2563800968074105,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1515411761","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.93110883,0.002930522,0.00013025936,0.002110868,0.00040877485,0.0004505699,0.00006215606,0.000017149812,0.06278087],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99887127,0.00032954142,0.000015788351,0.00015117627,0.00012899548,0.00003322574,0.0000022092004,0.000005249459,0.00046252427],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9981732,0.0003765765,0.00044170488,0.00017526028,0.00055241294,0.0002808583],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986226,0.00066317915,0.00024018392,0.0001474147,0.00025828948,0.00006836056],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022043,0.00012242422,0.00027265964,0.00003816256,0.00049233023,0.00012699825,0.0002546618,0.000041862888,0.0000034530533],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00053192105,0.00007685742,0.000045089055,0.00034173543,0.001391309,0.00042257065,0.00009489972,0.00016607222,0.0000060349325],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004386717,0.00008339128,0.012108433,0.000033308614,0.000101197846,0.000010357919,0.16038118,0.0009241891,0.00027162267,0.819919,0.0046982686,0.0014251984],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002327657,0.00037767336,0.035472613,0.00026591297,0.00014552158,0.000013499943,0.32735085,0.0008128933,0.0035486892,0.18619144,0.44302514,0.00046809137],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.09832277,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.039406113,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.63372755,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000791343,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004323169,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.97812223},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1580343503","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2011.00484.x","title":"When Is a Country Multinational? Problems with Statistical and Subjective Approaches*","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Systems and Governance","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"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":"Multinational corporation; Allegiance; State (computer science); Sovereignty; German; Dilemma; Political science; Plural; Sociology; Political economy; Law and economics; Law; Positive economics; Epistemology; Economics; Politics; History; Philosophy","score_opus":0.04508772287482416,"score_gpt":0.2586104444013328,"score_spread":0.21352272152650864,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1580343503","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.27973685,0.00044660803,0.070035614,0.0036855107,0.00020572476,0.0019713761,0.0006132907,0.00016880158,0.64313626],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9938359,0.0000077369405,0.0031933507,0.00018818225,0.00009683478,0.00004752112,0.000003485574,0.0000061604906,0.002620805],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992093,0.0000672274,0.00010159218,0.00016881543,0.00025742786,0.00019565116],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996281,0.0000886957,0.000051718198,0.000063880274,0.000060530012,0.00010706248],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00022697594,0.00006492684,0.000093740564,0.000011822721,0.00019381952,0.000044388147,0.000061010818,0.000052072475,0.00019843855],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000089042755,0.00005031904,0.00000883023,0.00006153864,0.00026249987,0.00016772331,0.00001267252,0.000062712345,0.000017961615],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000012239806,0.000051230913,0.018764254,0.000014487729,0.000018851955,0.0000023707478,0.04157991,1.6798106e-7,0.0000031432703,0.9373522,0.0014563461,0.0007448249],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0013261855,0.00031583334,0.557921,0.000084811254,0.00006502142,0.000008648436,0.004294711,0.0013214891,0.00023674095,0.13778177,0.29600313,0.0006406582],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02937763,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006849264,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7995704,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000056202764,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001300218,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9770858},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1586613920","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00203","title":"Placing Indigenous Rights to Self‐Determination in an Ecological Context","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Indigenous Studies and Ecology","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Indigenous; Indigenous rights; Context (archaeology); Traditional knowledge; Environmental ethics; Land rights; Political science; Land management; Resource management (computing); Geography; Environmental resource management; Resource (disambiguation); Human rights; Land use; Environmental planning; Sociology; Ecology; Law; Archaeology","score_opus":0.04571723775842801,"score_gpt":0.3608290816082336,"score_spread":0.3151118438498056,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1586613920","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9868822,0.000042178217,0.00008813303,0.0005734272,0.00048287568,0.0013877965,0.0000070505926,0.00009992111,0.010436421],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9954717,0.00001760933,0.0004705274,0.0020024746,0.00026939675,0.00033702995,0.000008893981,0.000011962318,0.001410397],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.9980576,0.00032918138,0.00042682278,0.00026427634,0.00010499048,0.0008171478],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992378,0.00025215087,0.00010264497,0.00017515568,0.00012293068,0.000109353765],"candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00044096514,0.00012603901,0.00026179422,0.0001416162,0.0025986438,0.000010542573,0.00012265876,0.00024566738,0.0015003482],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000068022826,0.000107663436,0.000026758487,0.00017327897,0.000015312702,0.00013004066,0.00007559533,0.00033127717,0.0016771591],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003997219,0.0009013706,0.07680616,0.00005745331,0.00002231809,0.00010384079,0.910061,0.000047104015,0.00010559658,0.0011037857,0.0055968706,0.0051545477],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0057089687,0.0057816356,0.7222058,0.00014033249,0.000079839636,0.000022664888,0.077879235,0.010128496,0.00029583127,0.0020367783,0.17412965,0.001590742],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0018007873,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2082325,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.83218175,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000581534,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000066794535,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994124},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1598197424","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2012.00520.x","title":"Dworkin and Phenomenology of the “Pre‐Legal”?","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","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 Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Phenomenology (philosophy); Philosophy; Epistemology; Law; Political science","score_opus":0.01347234198795746,"score_gpt":0.27637469330809306,"score_spread":0.2629023513201356,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1598197424","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7999638,0.002967183,0.000042828924,0.009131893,0.0007276286,0.00021546845,0.000005042751,0.000030382484,0.1869158],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9929315,0.00033375405,0.00011080122,0.00033065374,0.00032896077,0.000004851761,3.6710833e-7,0.0000020662776,0.0059570842],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99957466,0.00008641025,0.00006150036,0.000046742178,0.000100650934,0.00013004043],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99979854,0.000031628846,0.00003969053,0.000078387915,0.000019618172,0.000032157943],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00022094762,0.000031591622,0.000054203298,0.000001283392,0.00028309194,0.000013062238,0.00009689001,0.00007251525,0.00014635296],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003276653,0.000020445703,0.000028891815,0.000097104545,0.0002779919,0.00011222488,0.000027446958,0.000060174032,0.000006111886],"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":[0.0000031845352,0.000045111654,0.025504166,0.000007745261,0.000026254185,6.791851e-8,0.15348808,0.0000011741358,0.0009187831,0.7962405,0.021758044,0.0020069047],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007120153,0.0000066274747,0.02305903,0.0000035504615,0.000013022583,3.6601895e-7,0.0044610836,0.0000012962465,0.00044886203,0.0021080354,0.96978056,0.00004633735],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002321233,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00037203502,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94802254,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000014300808,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000029939876,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2177343},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1761959659","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2012.00514.x","title":"Presumptions in Legal Argumentation","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Artificial Intelligence in Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"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; Computer science; Epistemology; Work (physics); Event (particle physics); Management science; Philosophy; Engineering; Physics","score_opus":0.05998884018687108,"score_gpt":0.40555798898407325,"score_spread":0.3455691487972022,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1761959659","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.82778376,0.00011484159,0.0035758845,0.0026093547,0.0009005578,0.00033578617,0.000004368738,0.000082613646,0.16459283],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99614644,0.000025537573,0.00046726485,0.00011272919,0.00044819943,0.000025950096,0.000002676888,0.0000040231,0.002767193],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992754,0.000111327994,0.00014103645,0.00007171116,0.00017510031,0.00022544256],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997353,0.000068547764,0.000033525757,0.000072754134,0.000026129455,0.00006376436],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004585562,0.00003922901,0.000046112087,0.000045428143,0.00022471741,0.00005375782,0.00007971196,0.00004658273,0.0010805115],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00012686648,0.000042663956,0.000020529318,0.00017912408,0.00009997621,0.0008385941,0.00000989061,0.000061322826,0.0005751319],"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":[0.000006204231,0.00014116346,0.061564602,0.0000020641592,0.000005394355,8.8189654e-7,0.04758311,0.000108860644,0.001098192,0.8739798,0.0035464019,0.011963323],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00013708921,0.000032850003,0.09498849,0.00001850256,0.000020724428,7.7993036e-7,0.016564324,0.00050943485,0.018344697,0.010819445,0.858181,0.00038264532],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0042237286,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011680506,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8631604,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00010577583,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000056137043,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99983263},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1920893504","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2010.00452.x","title":"Dichotomies and Oppositions in Legal Argumentation","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":12,"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; Dichotomy; Argument (complex analysis); Epistemology; Function (biology); Sociology; Computer science; Philosophy","score_opus":0.006254954551877653,"score_gpt":0.2411551073782732,"score_spread":0.23490015282639554,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1920893504","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.895523,0.000019630303,0.102007836,0.0010658505,0.00033917124,0.00016338869,0.0000018193512,0.000040886505,0.0008383872],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9895672,0.0000065871914,0.010005255,0.00009371349,0.0000529531,0.000023722901,0.000004848363,0.0000023023654,0.00024342553],"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.999555,0.000024845132,0.00012293833,0.00013657019,0.00008674617,0.00007393388],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997549,0.00002499249,0.000039146635,0.00013199454,0.000018126893,0.000030804513],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00012095137,0.000046658544,0.000052240906,0.00007423471,0.00007168607,0.00015225698,0.000085352134,0.00003086366,0.000015457314],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000010945235,0.000044657205,0.000011158311,0.00010165814,0.000011471415,0.0006579048,0.000023622066,0.0000681128,0.00001977666],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000007733837,0.00019366607,0.056340385,0.00003511202,0.000021223308,0.000018060573,0.008207595,0.00008797433,0.46339196,0.44596007,0.0032937534,0.02244245],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0012456917,0.00006871408,0.77675945,0.000025448313,0.000007694615,0.000031737225,0.00009356788,0.15859884,0.048718177,0.0021527535,0.011979359,0.00031859384],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00020995561,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00066852284,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.72041905,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000010609864,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000018823557,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1821068},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1933138509","doi":"10.1111/raju.12088","title":"Paying a Price, Facing a Fine, Counting the Cost: The Differences that Make the Difference","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Economic Theory and Institutions","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":31,"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 Calgary","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Section (typography); Set (abstract data type); Function (biology); Mathematical economics; Economics; Microeconomics; Computer science; Business; Advertising","score_opus":0.08582151452728418,"score_gpt":0.23203093299249378,"score_spread":0.1462094184652096,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1933138509","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.8991516,0.0016814098,0.02412038,0.007851272,0.00096674525,0.0006169547,0.00009365377,0.000058645048,0.065459326],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961539,0.000097396325,0.000057040204,0.0010163855,0.00020869377,0.00012014699,0.0000053610397,0.000010962026,0.002330132],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989459,0.000058882015,0.00040236837,0.00026593287,0.000041646937,0.0002852837],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986735,0.0003906337,0.00034045638,0.00051424943,0.00002966632,0.000051503026],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012724944,0.00015745999,0.00022352414,0.000046827958,0.0009583215,0.00040026152,0.0006082122,0.000058015816,0.00012502441],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00030603306,0.00008415832,0.00009177091,0.0001849497,0.00024399853,0.00020620605,0.000115664945,0.0002803575,0.00034540417],"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":[0.000010294495,0.000028857814,0.09944237,0.000006869926,0.00006394596,9.418702e-7,0.006967889,0.00019661654,0.000013061167,0.8886851,0.0014708865,0.0031131268],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0011043359,0.000089898946,0.33117217,0.00005694089,0.000054368134,0.0000385876,0.0078068725,0.03012997,0.00039502536,0.26389393,0.36441728,0.0008406194],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00034807116,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004688224,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6247912,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007663589,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000056643665,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.73707306},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1963569351","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00177","title":"Legal Obligation and Aesthetic Ideals: A Renewed Legal Positivist Theory of Law's Normativity","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"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 New Brunswick","funders":"","keywords":"Obligation; Law; Positivism; Order (exchange); Legal positivism; Philosophy of law; Legal realism; Legal norm; Sociology; Philosophy; Political science; Legal profession; Epistemology; Comparative law","score_opus":0.01342387843461227,"score_gpt":0.27873197737541416,"score_spread":0.2653080989408019,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1963569351","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.7507876,0.00034985473,0.00077261135,0.0039278157,0.00011141107,0.00022097687,0.00001121796,0.000064944375,0.24375358],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.995741,0.00021140523,0.00019422437,0.00035561374,0.0001103868,0.0000087383,0.000007081941,0.000005000076,0.0033665467],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99897486,0.00032783955,0.00015992652,0.00012536033,0.0002572504,0.00015474924],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995692,0.00007033978,0.00010116211,0.00010309903,0.00009437306,0.00006186234],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00076077314,0.00007741825,0.00012752443,0.0000061827855,0.0005161396,0.00011473058,0.00009261762,0.00010073408,0.00006488663],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004725459,0.000068251684,0.00005809083,0.00016520813,0.0004503438,0.0005707773,0.000018487839,0.00009466004,0.000007743095],"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":[0.000020104986,0.000043961692,0.00034027433,0.000007762358,0.000011709327,0.0000033623894,0.024581047,0.000004889051,0.0009484945,0.9696988,0.0012471533,0.0030924326],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001281666,0.00024055631,0.011563844,0.000117899195,0.00013906733,0.000050610462,0.019873273,0.00017300737,0.0056626745,0.15060106,0.80964,0.00065632665],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0028981993,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0035718814,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.81909776,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000038938113,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008208491,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.43812296},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2006231667","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2007.00385.x","title":"Of Mice and Men: God and the Canadian Supreme Court","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Religion, Ecology, and Ethics","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":true,"ca_institutions":"Kwantlen Polytechnic University; University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Metaphysics; Supreme court; Law; Philosophy; Begging; Sociology; Epistemology; Political science","score_opus":0.0257359241189442,"score_gpt":0.28324271342538493,"score_spread":0.2575067893064407,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2006231667","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6690908,0.0013256331,0.000012552949,0.15972103,0.00016587847,0.0002546918,0.000007755639,0.000012802681,0.16940884],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99564666,0.0025555762,0.00005360189,0.0005006455,0.00007024116,0.0000029658652,6.385598e-7,0.0000020072782,0.0011676479],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99953586,0.00011128233,0.000078886296,0.00006667695,0.000095832715,0.00011148846],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99960834,0.00017562576,0.000030212164,0.0000538716,0.00005645307,0.00007547481],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005700357,0.000031844254,0.00007589093,0.0000200784,0.00070716534,0.000018503422,0.000060388516,0.000082402126,0.000027153485],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00015276358,0.00002393751,0.000011870081,0.000058984682,0.00086920237,0.000051131407,0.0000072853904,0.00006764404,0.0000030831782],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000029358454,0.000016827425,0.07442764,0.000015132911,0.00005123533,0.000008007614,0.28969312,0.0000053305494,0.000096434276,0.45416856,0.1812634,0.00022494335],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0014069426,0.00007698192,0.18930498,0.000009092955,0.000052959604,0.000016512166,0.013420091,0.0003453735,0.00026856142,0.034362137,0.760501,0.00023534034],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.48323545,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8832048,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.57923764,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000025970985,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00040241037,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.54390156},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2018743301","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2007.00355.x","title":"Rhetoric, Harm, and the Personification of Progress in Mill's <i>On Liberty</i>","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Theory and Influence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"Laurentian University","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Rhetoric; Mill; Law; Harm principle; Harm; Political science; Rhetorical question; Scrutiny; Sociology; Philosophy; History; Literature; Art","score_opus":0.016270148268832572,"score_gpt":0.32157886331945856,"score_spread":0.305308715050626,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2018743301","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9003277,0.0005245389,0.0001581725,0.0040602,0.00010335023,0.00029171712,0.0000023421856,0.000018306391,0.094513685],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991278,0.0000778428,0.00008021163,0.00026935388,0.000079695266,0.0000082850875,3.5221356e-7,0.0000020247921,0.0003544433],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","domain_scores_codex":[0.99936646,0.00014302734,0.00012581861,0.00008071958,0.00014138258,0.00014256488],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994531,0.0003538103,0.000042044987,0.0000787496,0.000031483276,0.000040781713],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014717487,0.000036681835,0.00006889737,0.00002504788,0.0001281998,0.000019998346,0.00008927456,0.000040080322,0.000018554558],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00020828872,0.000024934008,0.00001816664,0.00015055144,0.0005955621,0.000103391685,0.000007673982,0.00006176613,0.0000070999886],"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":[0.000086055494,0.000028332903,0.0023835718,0.00000410315,0.0000024643366,5.5292185e-7,0.01507949,4.0093371e-7,0.00009948557,0.9752978,0.00007342444,0.006944319],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00571627,0.00054359966,0.35417396,0.00024445856,0.000072039744,0.0000037465338,0.025116546,0.00044602825,0.044426072,0.28807473,0.28030542,0.00087712886],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00013851261,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000091998925,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6872231,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000022805798,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000030432786,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21943735},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2027537097","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00224","title":"Delegation as a Source of Law","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"International Arbitration and Investment Law","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Okanagan University College; Okanagan College; University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Delegation; Mediation; Arbitration; Ambivalence; Character (mathematics); Law; Order (exchange); Political science; Law and economics; Sociology; Psychology; Business; Social psychology; Mathematics","score_opus":0.013196198800947252,"score_gpt":0.2247405094246471,"score_spread":0.21154431062369985,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2027537097","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.13216393,0.000013774196,0.002994134,0.0005395379,0.00015269002,0.000106453524,3.207833e-7,0.00004210094,0.8639871],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.98412865,0.0000010978691,0.00042614137,0.013030072,0.0001894726,0.00000875548,0.000018736875,0.000008383571,0.0021887033],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.999481,0.0000068176523,0.00017224038,0.00009257989,0.00017277196,0.00007457048],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996444,0.0000116274405,0.00011866192,0.00008071747,0.00013952683,0.0000050463887],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000114054834,0.00006279214,0.000065739776,0.00006190096,0.000076088,0.00008169028,0.00006056351,0.000026352049,0.0009901477],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000053854546,0.000059565285,0.00003919689,0.00010681884,0.000031167034,0.0006918728,0.000010104291,0.00003501851,0.00058548973],"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":[0.000004702651,0.00003469596,0.0003096461,0.000010671377,0.000009622069,3.5982063e-7,0.000034005796,0.000051513267,0.0020842806,0.9952268,0.002168401,0.000065305816],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00034530467,0.000010811269,0.00038269942,0.0000098006185,0.000017439153,0.0000012297168,0.000042383865,0.0023696532,0.024313875,0.059081938,0.91331387,0.00011098257],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008686448,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00010206388,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9361448,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000012374118,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000016326903,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999231},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2072611680","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2007.00381.x","title":"The Regular Practice of Morality in Law","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","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":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Positivism; Morality; Epistemology; Law; Legal positivism; Philosophy; Philosophy of law; Law and economics; Sociology; Political science; Comparative law","score_opus":0.02336370591314746,"score_gpt":0.31748462683176754,"score_spread":0.2941209209186201,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2072611680","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.18302783,0.0017745751,0.00004600201,0.05574841,0.00031192132,0.00036037443,0.0000052120013,0.00005013998,0.7586755],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9937347,0.001003739,0.00033162424,0.00051599863,0.00010579334,0.0000061493934,7.928887e-7,0.0000018996938,0.004299281],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9992839,0.00022233665,0.000105465704,0.00006294039,0.00022595612,0.00009940076],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995558,0.00016991075,0.00006191218,0.00011086504,0.00008094899,0.000020553429],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00069200713,0.000029058814,0.000053701682,8.9519335e-7,0.00060617557,0.000016620688,0.00012276454,0.00006164183,0.00002713624],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00025605643,0.000020045301,0.00003540518,0.00015761517,0.00061203405,0.000214672,0.000011399116,0.00008042065,0.000008517404],"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":[0.0000067337232,0.000037124464,0.00047369194,0.0000017360146,0.000007803452,0.0000026845862,0.04990427,0.0000070418737,0.00009096681,0.9338582,0.015481104,0.00012863982],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000077839715,0.0000071245363,0.00095757045,0.0000025459492,0.0000042970023,6.8242196e-7,0.009717735,0.000003954891,0.0004282243,0.004626908,0.98413736,0.000035762732],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002879357,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0030636524,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96865624,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000029601977,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007465945,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.46622735},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2118717622","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00191","title":"Deliberative Democracy and Liberal Rights","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Université de Montréal","funders":"","keywords":"Deliberation; Deliberative democracy; Argument (complex analysis); Legitimacy; Democracy; Democratic legitimacy; Law and economics; Political science; Liberal democracy; Law; Economic Justice; Liberalism; Democratic theory; Sociology; Politics","score_opus":0.035606189841252425,"score_gpt":0.3331400076000716,"score_spread":0.2975338177588192,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2118717622","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.31686005,0.00013282847,0.0005540943,0.050672505,0.00019123389,0.00014741818,0.0000050294834,0.00009675891,0.6313401],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99111634,0.000083819345,0.00037175114,0.0015203381,0.00060406537,0.0000038979983,0.000001909888,0.0000036993706,0.006294158],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.999242,0.00013088707,0.0001005271,0.00012625792,0.00017410165,0.0002261945],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994909,0.00019713903,0.00002073841,0.00007025902,0.00005858126,0.00016234537],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000215861,0.00006144109,0.000079377984,0.000022589264,0.0009477824,0.00008026314,0.0000704769,0.00009686754,0.00018857664],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00012071866,0.000054078337,0.000024182058,0.00010647043,0.00031067425,0.00030833643,0.000016825414,0.0001415592,0.000084445644],"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":[0.0000064159367,0.000019173434,0.00041296516,0.0000012273343,0.000007572573,0.00000948897,0.008018161,8.080088e-7,0.000020506905,0.98843485,0.0023504037,0.00071840733],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011068847,0.000020907415,0.0013450177,0.0000043107566,0.000008040065,0.0000016277794,0.00010946285,0.00005143709,0.00011909974,0.8978479,0.100290924,0.00009061464],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00093732326,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011819566,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6742563,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000029639783,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007705189,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7289672},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2154286082","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00147","title":"Scarcity, Discourses of Implementation, and Habermasian Law and Democracy","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Victoria","funders":"","keywords":"Scarcity; Discourse ethics; Democracy; Perspective (graphical); Sociology; Epistemology; Work (physics); Mode (computer interface); Law and economics; Law; Political science; Economics; Computer science; Philosophy; Artificial intelligence","score_opus":0.02881720967533737,"score_gpt":0.3725118150548618,"score_spread":0.34369460537952445,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2154286082","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.6821913,0.00017882133,0.00002893148,0.04279464,0.00003874079,0.00014681721,0.000034000514,0.000022533202,0.27456418],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9986224,0.00010911373,0.0001272574,0.0006684039,0.0001108008,0.0000020248858,0.0000031097843,0.0000026315133,0.0003542361],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99947286,0.00007425138,0.000107136875,0.00008339732,0.00013473192,0.00012764573],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99972755,0.000087756285,0.000020946243,0.000050657578,0.000026000902,0.00008709181],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00019482619,0.00004069598,0.00006997618,0.000012229003,0.00036647875,0.000039087518,0.000042328265,0.000039618055,0.00032158472],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000020875177,0.000038724353,0.000013313345,0.00005107108,0.0005900496,0.00022929248,0.000011385645,0.00005045228,0.0000040037235],"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":[0.000002653068,0.000011599689,0.0037799298,0.0000073326264,0.0000068929535,4.5001426e-7,0.0064725424,2.2764016e-7,0.000024940535,0.9849636,0.00022419466,0.004505649],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00029364965,0.000047071462,0.032310788,0.000011616001,0.000040367428,0.0000011011407,0.0025723758,0.000010895498,0.00092576095,0.9358615,0.027800407,0.00012442534],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004079288,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0044935285,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3164311,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000008315258,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000049786544,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.61666906},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2161815389","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2008.00405.x","title":"Locke on Toleration and Inclusion","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"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 Regina","funders":"","keywords":"Toleration; Articulation (sociology); Polity; Liberalism; Argument (complex analysis); Democracy; Deliberation; Sociology; Deliberative democracy; Law; Epistemology; Political science; Law and economics; Philosophy; Politics","score_opus":0.02213036907435186,"score_gpt":0.29323779627836827,"score_spread":0.2711074272040164,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2161815389","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.45476538,0.000103012186,0.001183273,0.004988597,0.00014043666,0.000094965915,0.0000052006903,0.000042082265,0.53867704],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99359775,0.000084855106,0.00019041127,0.001127164,0.0002395824,0.0000023399632,0.0000042202746,0.0000016552526,0.0047520115],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9995752,0.00004337872,0.00005675609,0.00006725221,0.00017663778,0.00008077683],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997974,0.00005656475,0.000019964364,0.000040270104,0.00003365857,0.0000521512],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00008448611,0.000032535678,0.000041879302,0.000016978798,0.002362372,0.000010438491,0.00003526795,0.000029130419,0.00006931228],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005365328,0.000030851603,0.000010689832,0.00005306998,0.00029663465,0.00007695438,0.000064705295,0.00003477986,0.000024559811],"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":[0.0000025782172,0.000012527819,0.00085412344,5.7191085e-7,0.0000016913142,0.0000029995165,0.0048390506,0.000006512788,0.00007221167,0.9906146,0.002912617,0.0006804968],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000868284,0.00004134674,0.0021097371,0.0000041325093,0.000003176911,0.0000026359926,0.00017028312,0.000035806974,0.00034075492,0.0013501149,0.9957814,0.00007377631],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00082679774,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002808167,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9928688,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003689146,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00033584275,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989364},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2274220625","doi":"10.1111/raju.12115","title":"An Argumentation Interface for Expert Opinion Evidence","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation","field":"Computer Science","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":"National Natural Science Foundation of China","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Credibility; Argument (complex analysis); Set (abstract data type); Matching (statistics); Computer science; Rigour; Reliability (semiconductor); Epistemology; Work (physics); Expert opinion; Boundary-work; Public opinion; Management science; Engineering ethics; Political science; Law; Philosophy; Engineering; Mathematics","score_opus":0.06657413016424077,"score_gpt":0.36987599475688343,"score_spread":0.30330186459264263,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2274220625","genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.015095532,0.00023271501,0.98149395,0.0019079938,0.0008226243,0.00033114056,0.000002162475,0.00008949701,0.000024386156],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9769556,0.00010370438,0.022199718,0.00013884132,0.00023455922,0.0000985057,0.0000026853993,0.000006247608,0.00026014308],"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","domain_scores_codex":[0.99921584,0.000062038525,0.00018676349,0.00026931212,0.00014541249,0.0001206522],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993306,0.000118932185,0.000099483485,0.00032475375,0.00007618093,0.00005005567],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002450748,0.000075208154,0.00007311292,0.000044231176,0.000085540756,0.000110732224,0.00028436413,0.000035243505,0.000021052534],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004996763,0.000052670854,0.00003128921,0.000067685156,0.000008350415,0.0017861879,0.000024951934,0.000014882531,0.00006123879],"study_design_candidate":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_consensus":"bench_or_experimental","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003360974,0.000101064885,0.001148452,0.000031343745,0.00001952774,4.2181935e-7,0.0059138425,0.00008941227,0.75390977,0.014972009,0.017102387,0.20667818],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0014889619,0.0007399729,0.010164236,0.00046684447,0.0000044770004,0.0000057091265,0.00011583699,0.20327754,0.7351336,0.0011580895,0.046935778,0.000508955],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000039661918,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0000117599675,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96186006,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000062104074,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000028477703,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21478552},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2397389185","doi":"10.1111/raju.12122","title":"The Forces of Law: Duty, Coercion, and Power","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":40,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Coercion (linguistics); Stipulation; Jurisprudence; Law; Duty; Power (physics); Law and economics; Sociology; Political science; Philosophy; Physics","score_opus":0.03305861707672286,"score_gpt":0.3289714597609529,"score_spread":0.29591284268423,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2397389185","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11320991,0.00040456967,0.00029652216,0.13293034,0.00027503556,0.00013946825,0.000016920301,0.00003410414,0.7526931],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978551,0.00015861087,0.000016536003,0.0003923497,0.00010253133,0.0000020350963,9.805734e-8,0.0000018743237,0.0014708412],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9995269,0.00007440824,0.00008119204,0.000054861986,0.00014237527,0.00012024106],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992266,0.0005694247,0.000024445144,0.00007290431,0.000054905962,0.00005168686],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00041278003,0.000028440123,0.00004581982,0.000005459239,0.00038687518,0.000022740589,0.00008053841,0.000050059793,0.000044313176],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00029180106,0.000014495656,0.000018079942,0.000026326554,0.0008467459,0.000107142645,0.000017813447,0.000034852103,0.000014593294],"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":[0.0000030978574,0.000003870492,0.00012435787,0.0000010598377,0.0000034591756,1.2659021e-7,0.0024316304,1.2869591e-8,0.00011892114,0.9961585,0.0006622865,0.00049267424],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007362821,0.000022187953,0.00079572893,0.000007867111,0.0000041196804,1.0415322e-7,0.00023152791,7.04454e-7,0.0009466654,0.7878177,0.21006432,0.000035417575],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005599365,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008288965,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8846452,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000009565678,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000043775624,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.31198707},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2398482181","doi":"10.1111/raju.12130","title":"The Ambiguity of Force","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"War, Ethics, and Justification","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 Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Ambiguity; Positivism; Closeness; Order (exchange); Epistemology; Empiricism; Legal positivism; Philosophy; Sociology; Law; Political science; Legal realism; Mathematics; Legal research; Linguistics; Medicine; Economics","score_opus":0.051282833361938854,"score_gpt":0.25234300926403824,"score_spread":0.2010601759020994,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2398482181","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.37905547,0.00082858495,0.0040175174,0.037344333,0.00297903,0.00055704685,0.00014076824,0.00019406006,0.5748832],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.91011983,0.00005434296,0.000011155824,0.000058621845,0.0003512339,0.0000066819894,0.0000017709885,0.000004279003,0.08939209],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99961203,0.000024568373,0.00013159808,0.00006408297,0.00009424051,0.00007349856],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994775,0.0001498079,0.00006802815,0.0001756533,0.00011501392,0.000014004421],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00020836612,0.000038099217,0.000049112943,0.0000117674,0.00028679916,0.00004252625,0.00008839795,0.000020972164,0.000316463],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007887073,0.000018830846,0.000031284355,0.000008183737,0.00023580759,0.00009736138,0.000010298277,0.000033013832,0.00009494924],"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":[0.000008240138,0.000012342641,0.000054896827,0.000008418209,0.000011007712,7.432297e-8,0.011490643,2.4778615e-7,0.0023578098,0.9592973,0.016338276,0.010420752],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00021758334,0.000046885885,0.0014833685,0.000022646449,0.00002150568,2.5573152e-7,0.001746622,0.000027407157,0.020643668,0.057613447,0.91807586,0.00010073898],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000100771824,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011835018,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9017376,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000009161494,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000023476254,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3465048},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2742639438","doi":"10.1111/raju.12166","title":"When Trumps Clash: Dworkin and the Doctrine of Proportionality","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Doctrine; Proportionality (law); Law and economics; Law; Political science; Philosophy; Sociology","score_opus":0.07090649790703209,"score_gpt":0.36574322945375987,"score_spread":0.2948367315467278,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2742639438","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.1539103,0.0001813807,0.00018345591,0.32057244,0.0002670074,0.00039416587,0.000018809009,0.000026340484,0.5244461],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99786484,0.00010333997,0.000103589366,0.00032758666,0.0003627234,0.0000063170755,8.8396683e-7,0.0000016947369,0.001229038],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9993058,0.00014007825,0.000132317,0.000080179285,0.00022732485,0.00011429523],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993779,0.00020002123,0.00010462777,0.00020225122,0.00006140001,0.000053809545],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00122098,0.00003751004,0.00009392506,0.0000076645165,0.00084797596,0.000071469745,0.00018597112,0.000063017964,0.00006988156],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009885232,0.000024473045,0.00003526145,0.000017680577,0.0018206281,0.00013236208,0.00004131478,0.000107070264,0.000007148788],"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":[0.000020211193,0.000011674323,0.0015683542,0.000006689929,0.0000078228595,3.2055033e-7,0.0026732401,2.9378907e-7,0.0000042564607,0.9946956,0.0004914432,0.00052011723],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00033640934,0.000009741577,0.019192781,0.000008058563,0.000014511192,1.931009e-7,0.00008880363,0.000031402327,0.00013839717,0.9358728,0.044263035,0.000043871532],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0027991033,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001079886,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.84395456,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000012426243,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00011167378,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.670818},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2800376573","doi":"10.1111/raju.12200","title":"Ownership, Use, and Exclusivity: The Kantian Approach","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":49,"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":"Object (grammar); Reciprocal; Law and economics; Usability; Contrast (vision); Epistemology; Law; Philosophy; Sociology; Computer science; Political science; Artificial intelligence; Linguistics","score_opus":0.1058675165811877,"score_gpt":0.33556934005620687,"score_spread":0.22970182347501916,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2800376573","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.14982723,0.00011772319,0.00311915,0.08294218,0.00042539238,0.00033769605,0.000012600275,0.00012324355,0.7630948],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9946287,0.000023421451,0.0002443716,0.0023384157,0.0011828956,0.0000042482925,0.000001135997,0.000004286836,0.0015724675],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99916077,0.00021614679,0.00007361317,0.0001249964,0.00020656026,0.00021793839],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994042,0.00027025564,0.00002241104,0.00013816186,0.00006605819,0.000098923876],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006710567,0.000052693922,0.000062299805,0.000015482623,0.0009986125,0.00017538948,0.00012788324,0.00009525778,0.00004810644],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005493537,0.0000343874,0.000022911974,0.00012797164,0.0012513711,0.0002485376,0.00004073106,0.00014784718,0.000035838715],"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":[0.0000030759409,0.000014768158,0.0005958873,0.0000030184256,0.0000072831353,4.3552464e-7,0.015032545,1.7558466e-7,0.000016591235,0.98167825,0.0021834583,0.00046450156],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00019075409,0.00006895389,0.012646199,0.000010452073,0.0000428876,0.0000021159938,0.0033985614,0.00041873739,0.00030627364,0.4593321,0.52332777,0.00025517415],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0014351258,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0011076789,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.84480155,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000017258284,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000902473,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7680621},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2998571529","doi":"10.1111/raju.12256","title":"Soldiers as Public Officials: A Moral Justification for Combatant Immunity","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"War, Ethics, and Justification","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":6,"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":"Doctrine; Combatant; Law; Harm; Convention; Just war theory; Political science; State (computer science); Sociology; Spanish Civil War","score_opus":0.12275815888313198,"score_gpt":0.29184074913020547,"score_spread":0.1690825902470735,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2998571529","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.84491223,0.00044128828,0.003292243,0.012697531,0.004700066,0.0026578375,0.00037049153,0.00047819858,0.13045008],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.97987056,0.000025503017,0.00015604825,0.00039516867,0.0006178601,0.00009096781,0.000465341,0.000025423387,0.018353147],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9989154,0.0000782317,0.00033544065,0.0002401561,0.00019426974,0.00023651104],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987316,0.00017829529,0.0001866473,0.00042402803,0.00041869193,0.000060722192],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005961654,0.00013597234,0.00018493635,0.00010626261,0.00059457315,0.00037567472,0.0002101017,0.00009414986,0.001295154],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00021415483,0.00013041512,0.000090821144,0.00004557976,0.00016663419,0.0004591038,0.000022742635,0.00017248228,0.0007940007],"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":[0.00004170013,0.00011952598,0.00011040735,0.00008799642,0.000038252856,1.5588151e-7,0.025721328,0.000014657225,0.0013054742,0.9570359,0.012663948,0.0028606602],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00090620515,0.00026371563,0.00107818,0.000034467204,0.00012180163,0.0000014685266,0.021690423,0.0052759526,0.0024883747,0.022424575,0.94520885,0.0005060146],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005355689,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0010761287,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9346113,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006134328,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00017954456,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999984},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3009134116","doi":"10.1111/raju.12288","title":"The Nature of Law and Potential Coercion","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Free Will and Agency","field":"Neuroscience","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"McMaster University","funders":"","keywords":"Coercion (linguistics); Morality; Appeal; Law; Enforcement; Political science; Compliance (psychology); Law enforcement; Law and economics; Sociology; Psychology; Philosophy; Social psychology","score_opus":0.013910092564541496,"score_gpt":0.23432474084796528,"score_spread":0.22041464828342378,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3009134116","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9525807,0.00073275954,0.0004434795,0.02494757,0.00046351965,0.00021895408,0.000028362965,0.00005731186,0.020527344],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9975202,0.00008416094,0.000022879485,0.0021498841,0.00008089471,0.0000011710176,4.111413e-7,0.0000027864082,0.00013761179],"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","domain_scores_codex":[0.9996663,0.000026465392,0.00006379422,0.000094851835,0.000092704824,0.00005591586],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99984044,0.00003577669,0.000025150266,0.00006282022,0.000009307987,0.000026502032],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000025959169,0.000033372147,0.00003932055,0.0000033286087,0.000118248674,0.000022512499,0.00007800595,0.00003054524,0.000015252627],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007566837,0.000020760359,0.000016124117,0.000050542752,0.00007856666,0.00005847022,0.000028152317,0.00008934494,0.000008992242],"study_design_candidate":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_consensus":"bench_or_experimental","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000020326606,0.000009890648,0.000035217687,0.000009551194,0.0000016593447,0.000007617485,0.00039454023,0.000009866955,0.8815567,0.11242772,0.0037845348,0.0017424107],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002161032,0.00009459217,0.0010399141,0.000004332727,0.000008469669,0.000005564494,0.000026196734,0.002601442,0.9051731,0.001960469,0.08879436,0.000075421056],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0000064154406,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000004572588,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.11046725,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000012545653,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000068762283,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.090948515},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121890113","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00208","title":"Judicial Hegemony: Dworkin’s <i>Freedom’s Law</i> and the Spectrum of Constitutional Democracies","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","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":true,"ca_institutions":"Laurentian University","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Supreme court; Democracy; Political science; Constitutional law; Judicial review; Law and economics; Sociology; Politics","score_opus":0.02104602275551616,"score_gpt":0.2454582728427759,"score_spread":0.22441225008725973,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3121890113","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.009377309,0.006306028,0.0007327052,0.046672992,0.000694787,0.00038834923,0.000032883807,0.00006043764,0.9357345],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961158,0.0017901241,0.000080728365,0.000971087,0.0006900541,0.0000161087,0.0000012076724,0.0000021817011,0.00033270926],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99898314,0.000112843605,0.000203544,0.00013544956,0.00037146223,0.00019356387],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994537,0.00025988184,0.00008625186,0.00007812266,0.00007377815,0.000048251935],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003585916,0.000087513596,0.00018969997,0.000024823124,0.0014909006,0.000046834906,0.00013217804,0.000052001906,0.0002437851],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001415415,0.000063356594,0.000069394766,0.00018007851,0.010803417,0.00013328902,0.000051778658,0.00008784373,0.000038822745],"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":[0.000021146558,0.000024922656,0.001160545,0.0000017513496,0.00003779842,0.0000017410015,0.001972767,0.000009815858,0.000010252587,0.9911709,0.005323057,0.0002653181],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00156087,0.000045633835,0.002757285,0.00004159406,0.00011907118,0.000008713454,0.0018698565,0.0001621459,0.00016211988,0.3789606,0.61403066,0.00028145182],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0065385336,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009934147,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9867385,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003140213,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008698161,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999809},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4212915363","doi":"10.1111/raju.12334","title":"Bentham’s Public Utilitarianism and Its Jurisprudential Significance","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"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":"Utilitarianism; Morality; Jurisprudence; Jeremy bentham; Law; Philosophy of law; Legislator; Normative; Philosophy; Interpretation (philosophy); Sociology; Law and economics; Political science; Public law; Legislation","score_opus":0.03822280387896085,"score_gpt":0.31937847158636057,"score_spread":0.28115566770739975,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4212915363","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.624385,0.0026031986,0.0035491195,0.07657706,0.0007245364,0.0007818909,0.00013151015,0.00027707813,0.29097065],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9950623,0.00033193413,0.00029117137,0.00030779676,0.00032891973,0.00003637901,0.000010124555,0.000006390843,0.0036249654],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9990873,0.000088801586,0.00013454213,0.00023272353,0.00022414427,0.00023252289],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995209,0.000054971457,0.000040433697,0.00014293054,0.00012886916,0.00011192693],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00024182723,0.00006323849,0.00008322206,0.000019707815,0.0006928053,0.00024668506,0.00012743636,0.000065238615,0.00044830734],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00012021665,0.000068676825,0.00003601266,0.0002227395,0.000077384895,0.00028573204,0.00006650489,0.00008675011,0.00010087281],"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":[0.000001079418,0.000035086756,0.00036047024,0.0000050618532,0.000010734714,0.000004357929,0.0022084194,5.408624e-7,0.0044269683,0.9891846,0.001846204,0.0019164833],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00014825544,0.000007835673,0.003752968,0.0000035582366,0.000014202472,0.0000011278946,0.00093969255,0.00014448795,0.0065320986,0.0034029174,0.9849204,0.0001324472],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00039706368,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004596548,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.98578167,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003734914,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00034961908,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5328568},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4292307678","doi":"10.1111/raju.12359","title":"Raz and the Rule of (Authoritative) Law","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","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 Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Rule of law; Law; Work (physics); Position (finance); Political science; Law and economics; Philosophy; Sociology; Business; Physics","score_opus":0.018574767319440497,"score_gpt":0.28986633409585044,"score_spread":0.2712915667764099,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4292307678","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.14188683,0.0032948744,0.0001638103,0.038691957,0.00040290316,0.0003241207,0.000039960698,0.000029640125,0.8151659],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99884474,0.000072592185,0.0000378065,0.00032302004,0.00007391146,0.000024860983,6.916145e-7,8.359809e-7,0.00062156195],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9995139,0.00013741938,0.00006326245,0.00004911197,0.00017947124,0.000056834415],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99973655,0.00016338387,0.000030345152,0.000027309776,0.000030315583,0.000012073539],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00041095857,0.000022782075,0.00006190687,0.0000069846374,0.0014834241,0.000010222011,0.000060285034,0.0000067699825,0.00013074931],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005779054,0.000016286018,0.000021021327,0.000094378665,0.0009518069,0.00003771783,0.00005350888,0.00004171007,0.0000027210895],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000012801304,0.0000076946035,0.00020887266,4.3732632e-7,0.000011431622,2.8766576e-7,0.017178725,0.0000033127635,0.000015257781,0.9813517,0.0007280883,0.00048141103],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00046278402,0.000027991193,0.0025682617,0.0000020223877,0.000022868995,4.1584622e-7,0.026437866,0.000013656405,0.00007901642,0.36489344,0.60542595,0.000065726876],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012929503,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0014277616,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.85695785,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000014904093,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000056010835,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99981654},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4409537311","doi":"10.1111/raju.12405","title":"Issue Information","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"paratext","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Free Will and Agency","field":"Neuroscience","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":true,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Universität Mannheim; University of Toronto; Università di Bologna; Victoria University; Washington University in St. Louis; University of New South Wales; Victoria University of Wellington; Yale University; University of Oxford; Harvard University; University of Miami; Università degli Studi di Milano","keywords":"Philosophy; Computer science; Political science","score_opus":0.013995316654921113,"score_gpt":0.26335699174002714,"score_spread":0.249361675085106,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4409537311","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.00011244506,0.00030153943,0.0016710927,0.001088256,0.008089786,0.00031840554,0.0003175409,0.00006643058,0.9880345],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0024237223,0.0010822878,0.00006504675,0.003320027,0.00062456506,0.000047759622,0.00021698666,0.00000926051,0.9922103],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99901867,0.000053553507,0.00029628453,0.00021263798,0.00023149628,0.00018736691],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99939436,0.000069428395,0.00014279381,0.0003106403,0.000040628693,0.000042151627],"candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.000047585396,0.00018224318,0.00018698616,0.00016830371,0.00014712507,0.00014796999,0.00030693848,0.0001996231,0.011143576],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00019832404,0.00016342069,0.00007312952,0.0002978564,0.00003613758,0.00048866664,0.00007368027,0.0002483338,0.13366987],"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":[0.0000032619814,0.0000099550325,3.5826972e-7,0.0000860238,0.000002568779,0.0000011946476,0.00014259933,0.00004386924,0.0014062092,0.0005541386,0.9873429,0.01040694],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009282055,0.000019305015,0.0000068468557,0.000043700154,0.000008559386,0.0000013146034,0.00000591613,0.00019551048,0.04676591,0.000056102894,0.9526428,0.00016123406],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000049535116,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0000030405376,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.122526295,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000039595107,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00018942953,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9897604},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4410865059","doi":"10.1111/raju.12426","title":"Reflections on Complexity, Evidence, and Law","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":true,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":false,"ca_institutions":"International Political Science Association","funders":"","keywords":"Philosophy; Law; Political science; Epistemology","score_opus":0.1190413797807385,"score_gpt":0.43615835112265344,"score_spread":0.31711697134191497,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4410865059","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.0069937115,0.0003995113,0.00009561203,0.023769405,0.00026912589,0.00012623837,0.0000027865058,0.0000758194,0.9682678],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.96035534,0.00056698784,0.00041451812,0.004264425,0.00018647431,0.000013687446,0.0000013898202,0.0000020023977,0.03419518],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9995448,0.00007877634,0.000060093687,0.00010514806,0.00011740325,0.00009377357],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997402,0.00009623086,0.000015895228,0.00007396241,0.00004282435,0.000030928695],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00018720292,0.000038700022,0.0000538889,0.000004079822,0.0011614152,0.0000971782,0.000072515344,0.00006758262,0.00012764371],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006331811,0.00003413552,0.000028529184,0.00021408458,0.00033735784,0.00013186804,0.000017750468,0.00008577396,0.000024679339],"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":[0.0000020425666,0.000014842144,0.000102839076,0.0000032669845,0.000007837976,1.9463923e-7,0.0065177185,0.000001023498,0.00007829376,0.952289,0.040800925,0.00018203502],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006128574,0.000017690309,0.0012699531,0.000037287726,0.000012320823,1.10819705e-7,0.0027627684,0.000004938714,0.00014546153,0.107035816,0.8885983,0.00005404655],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0011583505,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.011823925,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.95336163,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004206341,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000058916445,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8932784},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}