{"meta":{"query_hash":"b59149ec0bd2","filters":{"venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice"},"cohort_total":12,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":12,"exported":12,"export_cap":100000,"truncated":false,"label_status":"direct model label, unvalidated","prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated (Codex and Gemma teacher distillation)","score_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","snapshot":{"source":"OpenAlex, pinned release, all 482 partitions","release":"2026-06-24","frame_built":"2026-07-12"},"permalink":"https://metacan.xera.ac/q/b59149ec0bd2","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=South+African+Journal+of+Criminal+Justice"},"results":[{"id":"W11550258","doi":"10.1002/mrm.1236","title":"A comparison of South African and Canadian anti-terrorism legislation","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute","keywords":"Terrorism; Law; Duty; Political science; Legislation; Publicity; Democracy; Listing (finance); Presumption of innocence; Presumption; Business; Politics","score_opus":0.04988849936487587,"score_gpt":0.3452407630339255,"score_spread":0.2953522636690496,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W11550258","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":[0.93190205,0.002295764,0.0013123207,0.0021155267,0.00088232826,0.00027000252,0.00006332138,0.000032431817,0.06112628],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99383503,0.00001692414,0.004444352,0.00012168029,0.0012997523,0.0000017571468,0.0000013094665,0.000025220761,0.00025395144],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.996771,0.00037154742,0.0009326072,0.00024862692,0.0010012173,0.00067503157],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9967469,0.00025048826,0.0011396175,0.00023198793,0.0006950464,0.0009359609],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014560053,0.00023224392,0.00063498924,0.0005553789,0.00050909584,0.00012763003,0.0005865562,0.00016544739,0.00012222363],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001253466,0.00022257012,0.00015384078,0.0006029168,0.0007742522,0.00050204,0.00005157318,0.0005413986,0.000022393759],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000104613704,0.00006788462,0.010853512,0.00007057475,0.000051320923,0.000034010114,0.9819466,0.00033286322,0.00006463704,0.0026055744,0.00023496118,0.0036334603],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00076934573,0.0004558829,0.006499916,0.00013287604,0.0019044649,0.000023194281,0.9089617,0.00035157832,0.00014301324,0.00017381343,0.080163255,0.00042097142],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009599217,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.010067961,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.079928294,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00029745238,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010676299,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9969959},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1824834794","doi":"","title":"Sentencing the corporate offender in South Africa : a comparative approach","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Corporation; Punishment (psychology); Commission; Sentencing guidelines; Political science; Criminal law; Law; Corporate crime; Criminal procedure; Criminology; Corporate law; Sentence; Business; Sociology; Psychology; Corporate governance","score_opus":0.1706108760139859,"score_gpt":0.3380569271859532,"score_spread":0.16744605117196731,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1824834794","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":[0.8073829,0.0065010954,0.012624049,0.0006196389,0.0025235363,0.0007382005,0.000033388784,0.00006871406,0.16950852],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9934494,0.0000075478238,0.004356092,0.00014698705,0.0015907515,0.000009543574,7.6057967e-7,0.000024084151,0.00041483712],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99524957,0.0012936444,0.0008296725,0.00023117398,0.0013178984,0.0010780678],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9965067,0.00062614237,0.0014439443,0.000296589,0.00056134915,0.00056529033],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004149966,0.00028689162,0.00058119907,0.00030337615,0.0006126047,0.00015515003,0.0009946127,0.00012744339,0.00007307684],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0012135009,0.00020000138,0.00021675955,0.0011932765,0.00123057,0.00065696373,0.00012267006,0.0010226419,0.000065277556],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00020862807,0.000155552,0.0032488643,0.000052717533,0.00005001061,0.00003174118,0.98889333,0.00030143693,0.000021956173,0.0066569555,0.00025250248,0.0001263047],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00051778887,0.000111765556,0.0012853988,0.000057703684,0.0008910076,0.000025348783,0.9883467,0.00013165663,0.000020263715,0.00030051082,0.00804624,0.00026564163],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000081096034,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000019730267,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.18606654,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003082318,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005193328,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8155819},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W189665483","doi":"","title":"Judicial discretion to exclude evidence in terms of s 35(5) of the Constitution : S v Hena 2006 (2) SACR 33 (SE) : comments","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Constitution; Law; Discretion; Political science; Section (typography); Judicial discretion; Economic Justice; Judicial review; Business","score_opus":0.07030531263123174,"score_gpt":0.3675662191141264,"score_spread":0.29726090648289466,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W189665483","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":[0.9586641,0.0007550444,0.007041169,0.0038158845,0.0015910034,0.00062668684,0.00007096275,0.000016971284,0.02741814],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978916,0.000031596035,0.0012825715,0.0003399388,0.00037728396,0.0000017475804,3.3286753e-7,0.000006479118,0.00006842806],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9966456,0.00055596494,0.00095625455,0.00018136119,0.0012545569,0.00040623258],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99771667,0.00034807657,0.0010545604,0.00025817228,0.00038539513,0.00023711206],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001840799,0.00016617164,0.00044620526,0.00024662993,0.00024009458,0.00004171661,0.00090746983,0.00009853272,0.000049225404],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002992328,0.00012687789,0.0001795917,0.0008879917,0.0008241883,0.00040872913,0.000067654095,0.00039983058,0.0000057857337],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.001713897,0.00047164672,0.0155288065,0.000241201,0.00004428806,0.000066105684,0.9511866,0.0017309418,0.003317975,0.017452374,0.0006495051,0.0075966786],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004520466,0.0053285947,0.14127544,0.01110077,0.006401751,0.000078297955,0.78599703,0.00017355563,0.008179709,0.01431165,0.021020105,0.0016126351],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005573976,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00017261266,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.16518955,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002619174,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004062929,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.517393},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1900986889","doi":"","title":"Constitutional exclusion under s 35(5) of the Constitution: should an accused bear a 'threshold burden' of proving that his or her constitutional right has been infringed?","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Constitution; Law; Charter; Supreme court; Constitutional right; Political science; Interpretation (philosophy); Philosophy","score_opus":0.11860843812498421,"score_gpt":0.34083033410066355,"score_spread":0.22222189597567932,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1900986889","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":[0.9582778,0.00032920248,0.0077257133,0.005107913,0.003129053,0.00056485477,0.00012931212,0.000037257738,0.024698893],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99656224,0.000019652183,0.0020957515,0.00018601498,0.00095860625,0.000003909621,0.000002122619,0.000007739073,0.00016397757],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9962798,0.0002734561,0.0008997051,0.00028734026,0.0018016312,0.00045807194],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99632585,0.0005619986,0.0012078086,0.00034209577,0.0011642281,0.00039802433],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0017735529,0.00026166614,0.00051158044,0.00017652869,0.00139498,0.00012919927,0.00103298,0.00023203445,0.00080955896],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0015765845,0.00017786356,0.00029065713,0.00043602235,0.015524114,0.00089491473,0.00017024876,0.0008809201,0.0000058442306],"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":[0.001345693,0.00032644608,0.0032705935,0.00038702757,0.000121056255,0.00012724621,0.042707678,0.0018874304,0.009704566,0.93909776,0.0004644587,0.00056002085],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0077993763,0.002569161,0.00889959,0.005254206,0.01431731,0.0031547814,0.7382649,0.0006278256,0.020667857,0.013194564,0.18268974,0.0025606751],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00046471765,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00064762443,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9259032,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00015950533,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00490195,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99990505},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1930724199","doi":"","title":"Pillay and Others v S : trial fairness; the doctrine of discoverability; and the concept of 'detriment' - the impact of the Canadian s 24 (2) provision on South African s 35 (5) jurisprudence : comment","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Discoverability; Jurisprudence; Doctrine; Law; Political science; Computer science; World Wide Web","score_opus":0.0259280608459404,"score_gpt":0.3247955542952449,"score_spread":0.2988674934493045,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W1930724199","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":[0.9793216,0.0017930679,0.00006074774,0.01248306,0.0004400642,0.0013622579,0.00016398342,0.0000054821335,0.004369722],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.999136,0.00003813927,0.00007764657,0.00020580154,0.00042711355,0.000007702016,3.1631996e-7,0.000015828746,0.00009147019],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99533695,0.0015979606,0.0009692851,0.00023825633,0.0013714932,0.00048605414],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99485034,0.002116808,0.0017216931,0.0005706302,0.00043610216,0.00030443692],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004217736,0.00026705736,0.00061712996,0.00013722917,0.00087277533,0.00013042112,0.0013312037,0.000092755545,0.000045856952],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0025156357,0.000109095425,0.00040069074,0.00064617547,0.004995409,0.00018803866,0.00016246048,0.0006513127,6.52951e-7],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.010231102,0.00015816693,0.001138004,0.000059285558,0.0002214652,0.0000031403986,0.9736727,0.0010244462,0.00003193463,0.010745772,0.000289713,0.0024242767],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.018375527,0.0040866155,0.0049875807,0.0003983523,0.0039098435,0.000017922797,0.9537827,0.0002120308,0.00076914823,0.0012769412,0.01173711,0.00044624633],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.037214406,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00617249,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.031041915,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00033884821,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001445448,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99771243},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2106245212","doi":"","title":"Should legal professional privilege be limited to exclude in-house lawyers under South African criminal law? : comment","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Education and Practice Innovations","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Privilege (computing); Political science; Legal profession; Common law; Criminal law","score_opus":0.1794632987499983,"score_gpt":0.3903842138655562,"score_spread":0.2109209151155579,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2106245212","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":[0.75246316,0.000096691605,0.0030050273,0.11173358,0.0049744495,0.0008892492,0.000070666625,0.00014861349,0.12661856],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9783174,0.000006773719,0.0051934733,0.014933381,0.00079705974,0.000022018288,0.000002611126,0.000047707264,0.0006795989],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9956939,0.0007800006,0.0010417369,0.00034006158,0.0013682997,0.00077597355],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99633783,0.0005845412,0.0009068944,0.00031334505,0.0010620382,0.00079533417],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0025600225,0.00030163093,0.00043586586,0.0006384413,0.00078262243,0.00024395714,0.0008518876,0.00017007682,0.0007164109],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0017534759,0.00027523012,0.00017186008,0.0012848129,0.00049409317,0.00114124,0.0001161003,0.0014290304,0.00006779642],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0009981835,0.00084497285,0.000536455,0.00008508612,0.00006462926,0.00010966256,0.7747476,0.00008044774,0.00007569897,0.2170981,0.005007029,0.00035209808],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000686361,0.00045260455,0.0035576215,0.00012585988,0.00093876396,0.000036365498,0.8897504,0.00000917546,0.00008693435,0.00046101515,0.10352049,0.0003743938],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0023869036,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001589839,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.2258542,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00045402296,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002313168,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99996996},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2258367759","doi":"","title":"Regulating cases of 'extreme hate speech' in South Africa : a suggested framework for a legislated criminal sanction","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Hatred; Incitement; Mandate; Harm; Law; Political science; Criminal law; Sexual orientation; Criminology; Sociology; Psychology; Social psychology","score_opus":0.04765374763878635,"score_gpt":0.2697585790390171,"score_spread":0.22210483140023077,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2258367759","genre_codex":"methods","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":[0.4753555,0.00013303959,0.52342916,0.0000778217,0.0005072536,0.00016102415,0.00000569125,0.00003708995,0.00029344598],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8414446,0.000002760934,0.15806417,0.00004365879,0.00037295226,0.00000590668,9.63386e-7,0.000022927807,0.00004203874],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99700725,0.0002956099,0.0010776094,0.0003840661,0.0006530522,0.0005824362],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9963454,0.0008117523,0.0014200129,0.0004246608,0.0007506368,0.0002475597],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0015824162,0.00028750827,0.0005861366,0.00067709666,0.0001833033,0.00013491554,0.0006836122,0.00016663136,0.000009134731],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002989677,0.00026463057,0.00025396948,0.0009303949,0.0001167486,0.0004864718,0.00008348336,0.0005459093,0.000005042366],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.010127942,0.0012905048,0.0015077227,0.0051983646,0.00049530773,0.0013274513,0.58744615,0.018878741,0.02902186,0.055172436,0.00029909227,0.28923443],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.018184653,0.031210706,0.013150289,0.010734437,0.012918193,0.008338799,0.44169822,0.31891334,0.08036401,0.05610815,0.003385785,0.004993404],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000024013187,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000007994023,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.3660891,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00010217706,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00018878294,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99998057},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2282477943","doi":"","title":"The role of pathological gambling in the sentencing of a person convicted of armed robbery : a comparative discussion of the South African, Canadian and Australian jurisdictions : comments","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Criminology; Law; Supreme court; Political science; Psychology","score_opus":0.0816407160527359,"score_gpt":0.3236185034298723,"score_spread":0.2419777873771364,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2282477943","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":[0.9938197,0.00035455753,0.00003365799,0.0018078992,0.00015904366,0.00029066965,0.00008638993,0.0000031911934,0.0034449066],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9995081,0.000023620205,0.00028949528,0.000035983758,0.00007923371,0.000003826848,5.9468044e-7,0.0000074864347,0.000051666757],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9965027,0.0012142636,0.0008379094,0.00015065834,0.0008875933,0.00040684984],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99685836,0.0007612382,0.0013740805,0.0002398734,0.00055185874,0.0002145814],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0016499641,0.0001653835,0.0005118757,0.00020768949,0.00065151195,0.000022368165,0.000760407,0.00009555252,0.000012975024],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0010818661,0.00007909324,0.00019067552,0.00084408483,0.0022058028,0.00012387088,0.000064029526,0.0005635029,3.478301e-7],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00020334475,0.000089341345,0.02139112,0.00004272308,0.00004360087,0.000017266932,0.9769186,0.00015785354,0.00051028683,0.0004700944,0.000028224935,0.00012758149],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00042393684,0.00026262668,0.03682496,0.00019632891,0.0005603931,0.000025226445,0.9604743,0.000087912566,0.00026687866,0.00011043023,0.0006768921,0.0000900771],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012988135,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007614282,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.016444225,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012229236,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006835798,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99358445},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2287127029","doi":"","title":"'Stacking the odds against the accused' : appraising the curial attitude towards amici participation in criminal matters","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Odds; Political science; Jurisprudence; Compromise; Sociology; Computer science","score_opus":0.13068801411180464,"score_gpt":0.37079714021066074,"score_spread":0.2401091260988561,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W2287127029","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":[0.9738628,0.00044620893,0.0026658406,0.012138908,0.0016637496,0.00030695417,0.0000045087554,0.000020813677,0.008890164],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961174,0.00008574095,0.00029027864,0.0020035484,0.0014264934,0.000009922464,3.3406215e-7,0.00001941124,0.000046854868],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9960154,0.0011325593,0.0008068048,0.00021988068,0.0011335796,0.0006917254],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99735385,0.0009827999,0.000763837,0.0003327528,0.0003809783,0.00018577486],"candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005121127,0.00022791562,0.0003053514,0.00015106976,0.001359184,0.00031366863,0.0014570449,0.00008175184,0.00009368624],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001847399,0.00011957265,0.0002301379,0.0005485186,0.0011246924,0.000552711,0.00012370481,0.00080074265,0.000022976528],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0007522061,0.00012522437,0.0010104466,0.00011221597,0.000053917858,0.00011389755,0.96779525,0.00044482824,0.00013664392,0.012403323,0.0005233285,0.016528692],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00048126956,0.00025139222,0.021377526,0.0003560786,0.0026641767,0.000047190173,0.96662116,0.00019942617,0.00015377403,0.0007235123,0.0068224245,0.00030204328],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0011455319,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00072998134,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.022254562,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00016927092,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00050851726,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.99994093},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3132853333","doi":"10.47348/sacj/v33/i3a5","title":"Revising spousal testimonial privilege and marital communications privilege in South African criminal procedure: Is abolition or extension the answer? Part 2","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Testimonial; Privilege (computing); Law; Context (archaeology); Political science; Sociology; Criminology; History; Business; Advertising","score_opus":0.07818039969400453,"score_gpt":0.33598407691269494,"score_spread":0.2578036772186904,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3132853333","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":[0.9423029,0.005987633,0.0017395478,0.034193765,0.001349486,0.0017283326,0.0002878586,0.00018250858,0.012227991],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9898646,0.00016734048,0.00637348,0.0014316256,0.0020020858,0.000014426812,0.0000039318065,0.00004920023,0.00009329874],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99520147,0.0009723164,0.0011846487,0.00050654483,0.0013053109,0.0008296994],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9958844,0.0009645849,0.0010805154,0.0005940392,0.00073663174,0.0007398311],"candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0021587585,0.00038974718,0.000666678,0.00022945105,0.0011312118,0.00039011627,0.0015086108,0.0001922437,0.000116424126],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0066568167,0.00029171168,0.00018518778,0.0011991422,0.0017019478,0.0007196247,0.00039367046,0.0013274928,0.000024896799],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0011085125,0.00016941405,0.0028196024,0.00039252487,0.000041377214,0.00025388904,0.98866063,0.000026989197,0.00008947369,0.0034700716,0.0006724394,0.0022950724],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0015208313,0.0012022378,0.007609649,0.00079087773,0.003080716,0.0001908257,0.92231333,0.0008801224,0.000040194813,0.00047351068,0.061145656,0.00075202517],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00012080843,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00010658835,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06634728,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00021961128,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0010937665,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999535},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3211268824","doi":"","title":"Quantification of damages for malicious prosecution: A comparative analysis of recent South African and Commonwealth case law (2)","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Damages; Law; Tort; Plaintiff; Confusion; Political science; Commonwealth; Cause of action; Action (physics); Element (criminal law); Liability; Psychology","score_opus":0.11505500301773637,"score_gpt":0.4004993345167652,"score_spread":0.28544433149902887,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W3211268824","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":[0.9708825,0.0009338382,0.013372531,0.000644671,0.00046900145,0.0006992265,0.0004982922,0.000024429997,0.012475563],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99281937,0.000028954959,0.006642047,0.00006106289,0.00037118405,0.000008256647,0.0000057528473,0.000012951178,0.000050411894],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99684346,0.00063143484,0.0011048693,0.00028157927,0.0007293394,0.0004092979],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99360496,0.00070048956,0.002236108,0.00032237242,0.002785708,0.00035038136],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002344595,0.00020753522,0.0009021338,0.0004951953,0.0005904388,0.00007262486,0.00043173446,0.00010911516,0.00005805385],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009665647,0.00018497507,0.0002273024,0.0015526741,0.0024478887,0.00024504884,0.00005959668,0.0002382503,0.0000017596204],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0010680943,0.00018855937,0.0006854558,0.0002566843,0.0005670461,0.000042641896,0.94887096,0.00012169899,0.00023531818,0.04743726,0.000073178555,0.00045310755],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008248093,0.0017027295,0.0006983856,0.000082938925,0.015165901,0.00004995388,0.9710163,0.0005321782,0.0010293972,0.0004094576,0.008210016,0.00027792103],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008283769,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0010068866,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.047027804,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00012793942,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00036629834,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.90193486},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4384451809","doi":"10.47348/sacj/v36/i1a5","title":"The adequacy of rape criminalisation in modern South Africa: A comparative study","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"route_ca_aff":false,"route_ca_fund":false,"route_ca_venue":false,"route_about_ca":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jurisdiction; CLARITY; Law; Criminology; Political science; Criminal law; Sexual assault; Sentence; Sociology; Poison control; Human factors and ergonomics","score_opus":0.12725805060837075,"score_gpt":0.3789522234718644,"score_spread":0.25169417286349366,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W4384451809","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":[0.9852547,0.0009484635,0.00063503435,0.00037599978,0.0007693793,0.0005474477,0.000020132507,0.000044964385,0.011403893],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987103,0.000022491875,0.00035645138,0.00001985119,0.00046606868,0.000016375849,8.2206617e-7,0.000023080658,0.0003845592],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99453324,0.0014905732,0.0012223838,0.00028102906,0.0017515233,0.0007212761],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99543005,0.0016940137,0.0012909506,0.00034607164,0.0009546191,0.00028431622],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004864631,0.0002508016,0.0006383971,0.0005397972,0.0006718263,0.00015210053,0.0011681723,0.00009863793,0.000026955237],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0028858506,0.00018910125,0.00021135292,0.0020229227,0.00085866306,0.0003960709,0.00013554814,0.00064831186,0.000040964787],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006017992,0.00018922807,0.0014027247,0.00005645054,0.00006939695,0.000100126665,0.9934066,0.000927709,0.000042026048,0.0022140965,0.00014103492,0.00084883743],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009099061,0.0006535352,0.0029549468,0.00007428118,0.0010359641,0.000003042499,0.99098784,0.00043731867,0.000030185527,0.0012662807,0.0014456239,0.00020108421],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00015285453,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00017405192,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0134556135,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00020685514,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00063099957,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7711325},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}