{"meta":{"query_hash":"9ce6205388fa","filters":{"venue":"Texas law review"},"cohort_total":9,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":9,"exported":9,"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/9ce6205388fa","api":"https://metacan.xera.ac/api/v1/cohort?venue=Texas+law+review"},"results":[{"id":"W254055643","doi":"","title":"Prospects for a Bilateral Immigration Agreement with Mexico: Lessons from the Bracero Program","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"International Labor and Employment Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":17,"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":"Immigration; Government (linguistics); Negotiation; Political science; Immigration law; Free trade agreement; Immigration reform; Economic growth; International trade; Economics; Law; Free trade","score_opus":0.04771760523447066,"score_gpt":0.3754322812899128,"score_spread":0.32771467605544213,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W254055643","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":[0.09393556,0.010533726,0.0030651733,0.15187018,0.0007516948,0.00019999851,0.00017582205,0.00006580374,0.7394022],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.87433887,0.014901128,0.0036328032,0.019837314,0.00081070943,0.00052478036,0.00028898273,0.00005124207,0.08561422],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.9970499,0.0010278841,0.00005291081,0.00024986448,0.00044626303,0.0011731049],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9968831,0.0017386586,0.00038114047,0.00018040185,0.00041383377,0.00040286008],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0069794296,0.00028540555,0.00026211634,0.0007114744,0.010878248,0.008225398,0.0015136285,0.005788144,0.015135171],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009352819,0.00024471345,0.00042462465,0.0014538912,0.0034061102,0.0072563956,0.005569666,0.0059341677,0.00053810125],"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":[0.00009269078,0.0001496652,0.00560578,0.00021168323,0.000011582233,0.0011997053,0.0082850745,0.0008251298,0.00014563602,0.894891,0.032764208,0.05581777],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00011945291,0.00021841601,0.017446997,0.0019566088,0.000046086367,0.00040600606,0.04166681,0.00174678,0.0005680954,0.116137914,0.8196197,0.000067019406],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06729684,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.07550112,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.06729684,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007647759,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.014362409,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.13381022},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W26938422","doi":"10.7748/ns.30.19.61.s45","title":"Unjust Enrichment by Transfer: Some Comparative Remarks","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"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":"Unjust enrichment; Restitution; Law; Pretext; Common law; Plaintiff; Context (archaeology); German; Civil law (Civil law); Adversarial system; Political science; Sociology; Commercial law; Philosophy; History","score_opus":0.05560637465699839,"score_gpt":0.36798483189039044,"score_spread":0.312378457233392,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W26938422","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated","genre_scores_codex":[0.018559074,0.03054668,0.016621811,0.075658284,0.0013702585,0.00011148997,0.00015620438,0.0000739445,0.8569023],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.85657966,0.026309304,0.009068896,0.02994983,0.005218687,0.00054981664,0.000332949,0.00014981971,0.071840934],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9927469,0.0038685405,0.0002931875,0.0006934148,0.0013518278,0.0010461488],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9939726,0.0042998,0.0003359432,0.00039335137,0.0008088429,0.0001895045],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0071762535,0.0007872937,0.0011087508,0.006035922,0.008077595,0.01171955,0.0026521422,0.0067934925,0.011061733],"category_scores_gemma":[0.012519329,0.00045206715,0.0014446382,0.0048174644,0.022816738,0.01832468,0.005482552,0.0066935234,0.0010894379],"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":[0.000011879254,0.000014313571,0.00012632762,0.00004273814,0.0000033679812,0.00007321922,0.0014101885,0.000071348564,0.000042430143,0.99218607,0.0027112218,0.0033068259],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000031909938,0.000070479015,0.0030681668,0.00056050176,0.000027266075,0.0002689985,0.01032255,0.0009854999,0.00056170864,0.7812746,0.20279017,0.000038129943],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.013040058,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.010158202,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.013040058,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.012206614,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0024545104,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08856559},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W278089968","doi":"","title":"A Canadian Perspective","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"Corporate Insolvency and Governance","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":88,"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":"Middle class; Privilege (computing); Law; Pleasure; Kindness; Population; Sociology; Bankruptcy; Consumer debt; Political science; Debt; Economics; Psychology","score_opus":0.024641108987269972,"score_gpt":0.24317726817074098,"score_spread":0.218536159183471,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W278089968","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":[0.0022682394,0.032203548,0.00018204286,0.29223886,0.007933978,0.00002762181,0.00096693437,0.000038603008,0.66414016],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.05141359,0.024067134,0.00053660345,0.13195613,0.0019055421,0.000052310006,0.00042500353,0.00011196704,0.78953165],"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9981331,0.00019896013,0.000040199157,0.0002895093,0.0005230586,0.0008151012],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986204,0.000106541775,0.00004582423,0.000049231097,0.0005310021,0.000646947],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0011396061,0.0005659989,0.00048573353,0.0011878031,0.021076685,0.009059034,0.0011966382,0.006256737,0.09010495],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002094827,0.0002480995,0.00042027503,0.002919938,0.0048870635,0.0042558475,0.003141808,0.006736638,0.009392324],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"study_design_scores_codex":[0.000010761355,0.000013112771,0.00039948203,0.000058797243,0.0000028167447,0.0001607934,0.0029721146,0.000019360228,0.000051979816,0.12855783,0.85122734,0.016525643],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000017014395,0.000001362848,0.00050125044,0.00007978093,0.0000014832962,0.000040718005,0.0022525662,0.0000070977876,0.0000094725065,0.0016441321,0.99545455,0.0000058756705],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9201401,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.95716125,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.94873613,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.05126386,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.08376557,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3719471},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W296842398","doi":"","title":"Constitutionalism, Judicial Review, and Progressive Change: A Rejoinder to McClain and Fleming","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"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":"Constitutionalism; Law; Judicial review; Political science; Warren Court; Scrutiny; Social rights; Economic Justice; Constitutional law; Constitutional theory; Sociology; Argument (complex analysis); Law and economics; Democracy; Politics","score_opus":0.059933132087847646,"score_gpt":0.3676803833157433,"score_spread":0.3077472512278957,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W296842398","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":[0.0019005502,0.04104199,0.0028591736,0.91801924,0.006056488,0.00004993411,0.000038296803,0.000047159763,0.029987145],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.19866776,0.029777939,0.008507477,0.66845506,0.049980026,0.000596477,0.00007541718,0.00022856612,0.043711226],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.94126695,0.026147915,0.002740536,0.007844926,0.018302582,0.0036970377],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.87610596,0.10249445,0.002785051,0.005671635,0.0107508795,0.0021919927],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0457607,0.00061170367,0.0018167252,0.0036497512,0.011978986,0.02139544,0.0056373896,0.045116514,0.0024366248],"category_scores_gemma":[0.12940592,0.0009963006,0.0015464763,0.0024002881,0.0558061,0.01711729,0.005717842,0.032160006,0.00066769397],"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":[0.000011520677,0.000013225463,0.00007521486,0.00006606,0.000010222945,0.000103796905,0.0017012459,0.00014126694,0.00004715677,0.8775164,0.11199098,0.008323011],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007061877,0.000022170294,0.0003606816,0.00048299387,0.000016893024,0.00012622976,0.00090013817,0.00049829413,0.0001252381,0.5523871,0.4449528,0.000056839966],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03371362,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.033638615,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0457607,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.019210553,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.029391827,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.24200863},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W303607783","doi":"","title":"Hiding in the Hulls: Attacking the Practice of High Seas Murder of Stowaways through Expanded Criminal Jurisdiction[dagger]","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"Maritime Security and History","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"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; Jurisdiction; Dagger; Political science; Criminology; Crew; International waters; Sociology; History","score_opus":0.046938932541502935,"score_gpt":0.35717039337520784,"score_spread":0.3102314608337049,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W303607783","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":[0.5094329,0.011500691,0.003941351,0.06500697,0.0011466825,0.00016152435,0.00008334496,0.00023823559,0.40848824],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.955299,0.003562255,0.0010321179,0.008102693,0.00024792773,0.00004653757,0.000025727608,0.00003549479,0.03164815],"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","domain_scores_codex":[0.998197,0.00087198056,0.00005152301,0.0002206316,0.0002182355,0.00044058054],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998114,0.00063141144,0.0005430292,0.00016378396,0.00021399256,0.00033386378],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0013612553,0.0005015126,0.00017405555,0.00181464,0.012347934,0.005205732,0.0023936988,0.007642047,0.007409418],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0064875074,0.00042170833,0.00029559562,0.0009988667,0.017760182,0.0038236624,0.0056235846,0.004885123,0.0007978612],"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":[0.000083806444,0.00017747017,0.04365271,0.00043830473,0.000036790338,0.02506747,0.49843457,0.0005895766,0.0012875277,0.21509671,0.112486586,0.102648415],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001894179,0.0002687792,0.03461779,0.0026353868,0.000058552167,0.025838545,0.46100184,0.0011610962,0.0011666026,0.020532617,0.4525838,0.00011613293],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.074333884,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.18005173,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.074333884,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0040888446,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004298647,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.14780241},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W316779082","doi":"","title":"Luddites No Longer: Adopting the Technology Tutorial at the Supreme Court*","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial Processes","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":"Supreme court; Law; Court of record; Law of the case; Court of equity; Concurring opinion; Majority opinion; Original jurisdiction; Economic Justice; Precedent; Damages; Sociology; Political science","score_opus":0.03193479066182143,"score_gpt":0.31783938553340246,"score_spread":0.28590459487158104,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W316779082","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":[0.0169254,0.007882208,0.013273001,0.41092163,0.006405571,0.00008124194,0.0001126155,0.0008163451,0.543582],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.39738813,0.010078437,0.009346248,0.19512098,0.004593278,0.00022484662,0.00018128913,0.00043009565,0.38263676],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.99542123,0.0014557327,0.00017776954,0.00053672236,0.0016288995,0.00077969744],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9958413,0.0024677387,0.00018510537,0.00023346329,0.0005869535,0.00068550126],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0042766486,0.00030572093,0.00024338759,0.0009867286,0.010742458,0.012089236,0.0018003499,0.01020549,0.019106925],"category_scores_gemma":[0.011170291,0.00042685008,0.0003565601,0.0007772219,0.007026416,0.012151302,0.0044077314,0.01167414,0.0047328323],"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":[0.000008810985,0.000074037205,0.00085266423,0.000058300426,0.0000031378177,0.00088325306,0.0064452863,0.00023787095,0.00061691,0.52781487,0.40199554,0.061009258],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000049683713,0.000041007836,0.0006319718,0.00024138862,0.00000599,0.0003735713,0.003277553,0.00033929123,0.0004523603,0.045700878,0.94889814,0.00003280492],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.010202013,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.033046424,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.019106925,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0068720034,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009432645,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06391901},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W327449872","doi":"","title":"The Cross-Border Trucking Dispute: Finding a Way out of the Conflict between NAFTA and U.S. Environmental Law*","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"International Law and Aviation","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"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; Political science; State (computer science); Common law","score_opus":0.030156011178217645,"score_gpt":0.38099778339837054,"score_spread":0.3508417722201529,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W327449872","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":[0.06720529,0.043364417,0.0033125156,0.5354781,0.0032541368,0.00004065877,0.000103432285,0.000057253037,0.34718418],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8711869,0.013047784,0.0024964586,0.07862304,0.0036184199,0.0000933294,0.0001391295,0.000047841506,0.030747097],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9945555,0.0024970172,0.0002698973,0.0006105727,0.0012785582,0.0007884995],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.98610175,0.010379523,0.001189706,0.0003462214,0.0014550756,0.0005276684],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009064395,0.00028443141,0.0004065727,0.0018892714,0.011699967,0.015276565,0.0017382933,0.018172983,0.007025674],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015764372,0.00034639772,0.00034333504,0.0039754594,0.013923001,0.011670191,0.004852867,0.007693,0.00047020905],"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":[0.000014996344,0.000031774125,0.0014685778,0.00007064756,0.000003987419,0.0006898581,0.012767282,0.00008188565,0.00011191502,0.9105703,0.05884485,0.015343972],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000021070122,0.000037904414,0.0028503467,0.0010872663,0.000015692754,0.0006519822,0.039895337,0.0007278578,0.00024237353,0.24350706,0.71092486,0.00003815786],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.023310162,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.039232805,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9766898,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00873511,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0077048764,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06337792},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W861021641","doi":"","title":"Dismantling the Carceral State: The Future of Penal Policy Reform","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"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":"Population; Prison; State (computer science); Mass incarceration; Political science; Realm; Quarter (Canadian coin); Law; Sanctions; Criminology; Sociology; Geography; Demography","score_opus":0.01637936038462246,"score_gpt":0.32617068071953986,"score_spread":0.3097913203349174,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W861021641","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":[0.003808525,0.05320494,0.0010309677,0.9064894,0.0019910943,0.000017744225,0.000034528664,0.00004800079,0.033374887],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5587481,0.130585,0.0036787887,0.2597112,0.014563212,0.00020946347,0.00013623928,0.000108879634,0.032259017],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","domain_scores_codex":[0.9920677,0.0037051488,0.00018150278,0.000523505,0.0012085198,0.00231358],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.989435,0.004374733,0.0007254036,0.00036769922,0.001924689,0.003172516],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008743495,0.000470509,0.00064076536,0.001893243,0.008499344,0.011460366,0.0020060465,0.01586472,0.013088839],"category_scores_gemma":[0.015696658,0.00028519935,0.0005570531,0.0017938926,0.020859621,0.015043272,0.0056583732,0.013633437,0.0014996399],"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":[0.00003246878,0.00014022441,0.0009555742,0.00027849374,0.000008723808,0.00010821802,0.0017374117,0.00086200837,0.0000936598,0.7949814,0.112511,0.08829082],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004480819,0.00008858258,0.0031783131,0.0026237043,0.000015877196,0.00008010856,0.0048482604,0.0022951444,0.00013089112,0.48773777,0.4988929,0.00006351175],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02501622,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03401166,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02501622,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.017858956,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04186004,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.12957639},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W96210955","doi":"","title":"New Constitutional Ideas: Can New Parliamentary Models Resist Judicial Dominance When Interpreting Rights?","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Texas law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":33,"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; Political science; Judicial review; Legitimacy; Fundamental rights; Law and economics; Constitutionalism; Law; Human rights; Constitutional theory; Legislature; International human rights law; Politics; Parliamentary sovereignty; Legislation; Sociology; Democracy; Parliament","score_opus":0.03310356322175908,"score_gpt":0.30227748066509436,"score_spread":0.2691739174433353,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","prediction":{"id":"W96210955","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":[0.01898981,0.013075887,0.102536894,0.4968057,0.0044860225,0.00010937674,0.00010590739,0.00021495677,0.36367545],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.83734757,0.0076368116,0.06548575,0.05086241,0.008124337,0.000512665,0.00013177509,0.00022851834,0.029670184],"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","domain_scores_codex":[0.9678287,0.018364301,0.0011376981,0.003198626,0.0077203265,0.0017502905],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.95865184,0.028387556,0.0028254143,0.0043928465,0.004080421,0.0016618897],"candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.039736215,0.0005626209,0.0007237418,0.003450138,0.006636245,0.018917143,0.004677252,0.00857761,0.0053075156],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04890085,0.0005800279,0.0006959567,0.0019107597,0.081371255,0.027160853,0.0055856826,0.012224226,0.001125459],"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":[0.0000021851467,0.000003186643,0.000026314914,0.000011512339,0.0000011616987,0.000007689898,0.0007868629,0.000057137288,0.000016481845,0.9957189,0.0010193961,0.0023491778],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001756968,0.000011488705,0.00010565622,0.00011739597,0.000005546374,0.000031751384,0.0009410541,0.0006205143,0.00010353383,0.9218701,0.07616122,0.0000141043665],"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005747458,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00817489,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.039736215,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.014429031,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008718911,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.21014768},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}