{"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.40846932,0.0037059323,0.0015542742,0.012173658,0.00018912223,0.00018798973,0.0028748089,0.00011226011,0.5707326],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.94905156,0.0017714262,0.00168912,0.0012456381,0.000020096311,0.000066084336,0.00068549503,0.000040215033,0.045430366],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9961506,0.00040128708,0.00006655388,0.00015846115,0.0020922567,0.0011308589],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9959266,0.0009260406,0.00028273364,0.00018833886,0.0022505322,0.0004258042],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022631083,0.00026643925,0.00018401885,0.0032138743,0.0057315347,0.0027432446,0.0007318572,0.000701533,0.011485135],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009108755,0.00019389749,0.00025415252,0.003963974,0.0018827172,0.0006954531,0.0011515691,0.00097556086,0.00054005533],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006791808,0.00015901124,0.092556074,0.0011394755,0.0001494095,0.0014558063,0.03879462,0.0036760943,0.0066456054,0.39714605,0.13171655,0.32588205],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003273152,0.000072387535,0.38779843,0.00042988025,0.000060872582,0.0004821077,0.025629075,0.0010452284,0.0030145382,0.0032349592,0.57809883,0.00010091071],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9338077,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.97211444,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9659709,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.034029156,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04013265,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24689996},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.757743,0.03202051,0.0015848745,0.0066160685,0.0003095002,0.00049977604,0.00019889009,0.0000074410686,0.20101999],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9662932,0.026157828,0.0013312753,0.00069958327,0.00006247597,0.00019102391,0.00005644416,0.00000803717,0.0052001732],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.99715567,0.0019721934,0.00008797264,0.00006813849,0.00020539422,0.0005105988],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9975674,0.0014952003,0.0003235911,0.00007180884,0.00041046902,0.00013156215],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0030333747,0.00050670886,0.0005647449,0.007111978,0.007318388,0.0040781535,0.0008700536,0.0023998066,0.0076176017],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009391539,0.00040249713,0.0004336842,0.0068364954,0.0034269372,0.0040822984,0.0032886567,0.0019859795,0.00043351948],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00093146134,0.0008400006,0.02889649,0.0070938347,0.00024639547,0.024280334,0.29291683,0.0016780453,0.0045269323,0.4685389,0.007096264,0.16295455],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000115883966,0.0014975027,0.09223757,0.008213506,0.0005486444,0.00977993,0.7247327,0.0012287082,0.0022863618,0.02457427,0.13468479,0.00010012293],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.034160875,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09567657,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.034160875,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.010008202,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0055986443,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07261491},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.083078176,0.004519439,0.016751556,0.40960118,0.008906547,0.0010565241,0.0011613228,0.0004919093,0.47443336],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.38200608,0.0014969457,0.007250693,0.5308623,0.0030256056,0.00067582686,0.00017056338,0.00015766502,0.07435436],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.98116803,0.003591339,0.0028329892,0.0030251525,0.0052762916,0.0041062534],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.97094584,0.02237657,0.0012153379,0.0012673723,0.0034526594,0.0007421517],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02573239,0.00092454196,0.0014512077,0.001394492,0.011794822,0.010372302,0.0058309394,0.052619856,0.0055413023],"category_scores_gemma":[0.055688884,0.0014985907,0.0021121928,0.0011643054,0.013095751,0.004800727,0.004505789,0.035292108,0.0023577588],"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":[0.00015202632,0.00008393514,0.0022599995,0.00027819458,0.000096393116,0.003839576,0.014124183,0.00056966615,0.0045018233,0.77440846,0.19114402,0.008541782],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002963656,0.00023511799,0.0047524613,0.0020626138,0.00029553016,0.0020820796,0.008110349,0.0016706845,0.007947991,0.16349863,0.8084858,0.0005623921],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.072295174,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.12805472,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.072295174,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007720462,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.017802488,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14374876},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.32674876,0.0060133296,0.027182272,0.07176161,0.0014822233,0.00029848117,0.0002102422,0.000093444716,0.5662097],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9781155,0.0009356301,0.004535895,0.008664693,0.00033174397,0.00012501997,0.000043125427,0.000017412054,0.0072309957],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98004067,0.0063565252,0.002106258,0.0020671175,0.0061614104,0.003268084],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9792782,0.014039349,0.0021308335,0.0016353645,0.0023451063,0.00057115254],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01904865,0.00045100183,0.0008318436,0.0018384184,0.0069488115,0.008522029,0.0016698717,0.00970541,0.0034328275],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03184343,0.0005420478,0.00088959374,0.001203239,0.03575749,0.0066037024,0.0066162953,0.010046951,0.0005631574],"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":[0.000022391587,0.000009920337,0.0008240009,0.00005430148,0.000010911715,0.00039024127,0.0066875145,0.00014771812,0.0007494101,0.9860394,0.00094575394,0.0041184984],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008341988,0.00023691067,0.007978313,0.0013542068,0.00016757063,0.0013579988,0.01470478,0.00097450323,0.00315968,0.7607879,0.20897582,0.00021886345],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.027650906,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.029313378,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.027650906,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00691791,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.021516718,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.100740075},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.018860813,0.0042932774,0.0026966783,0.8192384,0.004673839,0.00029001493,0.00049491413,0.00013830667,0.14931375],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1363249,0.0012974484,0.0020184943,0.82091653,0.0044892104,0.0003966882,0.000051053346,0.0000890646,0.034416556],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9782654,0.005458527,0.0016163752,0.0042925505,0.005919549,0.00444771],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9293279,0.059199944,0.0022291532,0.0021813726,0.0050555933,0.0020060113],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.025019651,0.0011550407,0.0023274824,0.0021481642,0.021498093,0.0119189015,0.008802534,0.12636536,0.008335881],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08609014,0.0019097842,0.0023762363,0.0030155915,0.03242583,0.008083645,0.004868778,0.05839124,0.001683873],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009098374,0.000027474354,0.00043491516,0.00008987727,0.00003770324,0.00030193228,0.0054630213,0.00020887986,0.00021298279,0.8754012,0.115818895,0.0019122794],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00073932443,0.00015353967,0.004729121,0.0009189383,0.0002912389,0.0005201634,0.007452858,0.0014849233,0.002330327,0.46933407,0.51149726,0.00054822676],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.48648745,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.56865805,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.51351255,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.020539584,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04142488,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.96731156},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.002253856,0.00032561526,0.00021306686,0.9900115,0.0018759462,0.000020367048,0.0000773193,0.000030335123,0.005192],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.011205881,0.00025927147,0.00020742885,0.9833876,0.0018822482,0.00003736168,0.000017203074,0.000015046113,0.0029880665],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99215937,0.0013552837,0.00073942076,0.0020773853,0.0019372688,0.001731374],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.96517235,0.025595473,0.001994372,0.001157342,0.0041018585,0.001978552],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.014225869,0.00065760536,0.0011428811,0.00068496045,0.011917565,0.004517729,0.008120226,0.0930515,0.011212865],"category_scores_gemma":[0.044425562,0.0010925464,0.002063251,0.0013565671,0.013254036,0.010405594,0.006319084,0.056472626,0.003806593],"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":[0.00011672064,0.000058208494,0.0028687823,0.00028583815,0.000037927413,0.00217519,0.01356336,0.00019742204,0.0010116653,0.086629264,0.8870364,0.0060191723],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00023691924,0.00015631416,0.010873925,0.0013161597,0.0001448279,0.002554956,0.036661893,0.0007700754,0.002271534,0.0573343,0.88727975,0.00039935845],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08605102,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.12896691,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0930515,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006501346,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.015735634,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17110032},"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":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.11042443,0.0064802775,0.2543175,0.30783054,0.004979653,0.0027482607,0.00018709285,0.00058300124,0.31244928],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.81487197,0.0018008419,0.11952451,0.03315158,0.0012202957,0.0023588622,0.00006603326,0.00008625891,0.026919689],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.98091733,0.0072069955,0.0017759938,0.0024025838,0.0040511834,0.0036458408],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9795781,0.010907241,0.00216606,0.0015936956,0.00417652,0.0015783901],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.023720821,0.00071057316,0.00082860683,0.004049554,0.008927853,0.01239222,0.0043502273,0.017006548,0.004307479],"category_scores_gemma":[0.028339444,0.00079759094,0.0015104099,0.000832133,0.015999017,0.0071513155,0.008161964,0.012920704,0.0007280469],"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":[0.000034599325,0.00016020612,0.0027248927,0.00018327808,0.000024361036,0.0015087588,0.00422619,0.002091985,0.0021665585,0.9618508,0.006617676,0.018410677],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00038630812,0.00076997746,0.014999092,0.0050990847,0.0003165662,0.003546283,0.017534036,0.019032469,0.007255947,0.5889612,0.34130678,0.0007922375],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.015399119,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.028565586,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.023720821,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0079162745,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.024388596,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.12544918},"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":"commentary","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.63824385,0.008531747,0.0004374958,0.23978671,0.0011211054,0.00020748968,0.0001447662,0.000013817212,0.11151301],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9430702,0.0067938482,0.00048534668,0.03360022,0.00040847863,0.00008851283,0.000042617452,0.00001189147,0.015499008],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99615496,0.00083994033,0.00020278037,0.00020187309,0.0008494191,0.0017509232],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9938689,0.0029646307,0.00048865424,0.00009307923,0.0015715378,0.001013316],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005301364,0.00035929724,0.00041720815,0.0023625956,0.027333759,0.005237239,0.0025068806,0.0069429795,0.0021862397],"category_scores_gemma":[0.016319852,0.0003533286,0.00063242856,0.0023250664,0.011046971,0.0016433742,0.0029054102,0.008382054,0.00019344303],"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":[0.00013952237,0.00015198719,0.038000043,0.0007110109,0.000046973277,0.018820887,0.72231144,0.00051557797,0.0014782168,0.14523585,0.04285433,0.02973418],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000014508319,0.000089341105,0.07891933,0.0010715127,0.00010905299,0.0020864413,0.8352578,0.00023814639,0.0005809959,0.0037978445,0.07771339,0.00012155013],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.89186716,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9640396,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.10813284,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.030825088,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.064694315,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.22365272},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.530602,0.0041348664,0.0039900807,0.08946207,0.000450534,0.00013735647,0.00002293794,0.000025228224,0.3711749],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9854977,0.00076481304,0.00050503854,0.008418687,0.0001334915,0.000044530727,0.000004527788,0.000010369272,0.0046208706],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9758783,0.014991274,0.0006080047,0.00087003876,0.004683793,0.0029685725],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9733315,0.016567262,0.004371099,0.00075819605,0.0034585067,0.0015134347],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.018661184,0.0003981512,0.00037370762,0.0024120777,0.014618307,0.014414702,0.001729313,0.011775407,0.0036323348],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05766625,0.0004104383,0.00047508176,0.0016946169,0.045143336,0.008174112,0.009205007,0.009271175,0.0006442407],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001307374,0.000064317064,0.012446393,0.00023359033,0.000025652504,0.002879176,0.35656372,0.000135549,0.00093767437,0.5980643,0.008081849,0.020436997],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006546566,0.00043281863,0.041908953,0.0026633504,0.00012438517,0.0030696809,0.62492573,0.00081787497,0.001732453,0.13862239,0.18546447,0.00017238433],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.012269061,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.023410387,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.018661184,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006926862,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0069741705,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09869099},"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":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.18626587,0.14521866,0.012323569,0.46442485,0.0045935255,0.00038725548,0.00015968873,0.000019436247,0.18660711],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9034351,0.04659279,0.002388608,0.037437946,0.0023577716,0.00015602037,0.00004379317,0.000014549794,0.007573561],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.99300086,0.00296453,0.0006727288,0.0005402222,0.0015826356,0.0012389477],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9715379,0.021109674,0.0033704927,0.0007204912,0.0024504,0.0008110572],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.010310752,0.00031515944,0.0005186435,0.002212803,0.005285915,0.0075845555,0.0015446551,0.0064795953,0.004257572],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04149691,0.0004802281,0.00064293976,0.0016645241,0.025176845,0.008447863,0.007481066,0.010382806,0.00023527352],"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":[0.000060045462,0.00009725356,0.012778712,0.0011229898,0.000038592818,0.0017460267,0.037339102,0.00061824877,0.00052227615,0.856092,0.0117061315,0.07787858],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000053318916,0.00018923219,0.057257734,0.018483587,0.00028971897,0.0041313213,0.09470206,0.0020145306,0.001654073,0.45314714,0.36781815,0.00025913093],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0756815,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.11862168,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0756815,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012328864,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03208964,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.150482},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9536983,0.0076159216,0.00053187483,0.0029552078,0.000052919702,0.00011594794,0.00010968573,0.0000037593616,0.034916446],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9947725,0.0034331314,0.00022694685,0.00024194151,0.000022135868,0.000035842175,0.000033577584,0.000003832675,0.0012300598],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99630404,0.0013521508,0.0003342556,0.00021450476,0.0008514312,0.0009436608],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9762656,0.017371587,0.0035685366,0.0004349269,0.0018381774,0.00052115007],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008532684,0.00024254298,0.00032542157,0.0122122625,0.0069311443,0.0044364263,0.001189391,0.0017332317,0.0044879797],"category_scores_gemma":[0.032674257,0.00040621264,0.0004417146,0.012171403,0.005955474,0.0040029217,0.0038475539,0.002004222,0.00017893223],"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":[0.00030600815,0.00039218698,0.1853191,0.0018017794,0.00019812373,0.017027687,0.37126318,0.0012750231,0.0015631783,0.3523987,0.006808969,0.06164621],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000025428235,0.000284568,0.5260143,0.0023763513,0.00018050159,0.0076814825,0.36663926,0.0015248106,0.0013737234,0.017041769,0.0767233,0.00013444752],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06382126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.18240313,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06382126,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012976597,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0045083114,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.12689954},"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":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.9727377,0.0043020863,0.00010151282,0.0012665963,0.000023029308,0.000053154607,0.000055487424,0.0000015766395,0.021458697],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9944318,0.0043090708,0.00010060068,0.00012715044,0.000016450274,0.00001956778,0.000024008028,0.0000035661208,0.00096780463],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9986694,0.00059367163,0.000097684766,0.00008805126,0.0001962677,0.00035486367],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971077,0.0014688035,0.00080477115,0.00012737373,0.00028166137,0.000209767],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0019922869,0.00025706674,0.00039742215,0.0039639696,0.0050391415,0.002906699,0.00054508646,0.00077600265,0.0051457835],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009089611,0.00034205354,0.00023822236,0.004802714,0.0072362674,0.002836681,0.0032783537,0.0016076893,0.00024061007],"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":[0.00029827058,0.00027408748,0.11205395,0.0018008178,0.00012531885,0.009715045,0.7246304,0.000362111,0.0015262637,0.07805117,0.0017781825,0.06938433],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000023457571,0.00025320143,0.31898388,0.0015811219,0.00007667244,0.005425454,0.6279465,0.00019675259,0.00036834902,0.004026439,0.04106922,0.000048980593],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.044078294,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.098296165,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.044078294,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0068599633,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002909878,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.087643445},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}