{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":1849,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":2,"predictions_cover":1849,"direct_label_status":"direct model label, unvalidated","prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated (Codex and Gemma teacher distillation)","score_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline (scores rank; they never assert a category)","snapshot":{"source":"OpenAlex, pinned release, all 482 partitions","release":"2026-06-24","frame_built":"2026-07-12"},"query_hash":"b8afe4694597","filters":{"topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence"}},"results":[{"id":"W2885549935","doi":"10.4212/cjhp.v50i2.2026","title":"Cases of Mistaken Identity","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":89,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Identity (music); Philosophy; Aesthetics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07238438431476989,"gpt":0.3793907287514035,"spread":0.3070063444366336,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000929778,0.00005515117,0.0001098573,0.00006067763,0.0006129652,0.00009592484,0.0005776998,0.00001688701,0.0007983478],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005226359,0.0000408736,0.00009088332,0.0001803212,0.001022134,0.0005484202,0.0000106003,0.000127082,0.00003317492],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001186893,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001556725,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3046685,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6132308,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990986,0.00009560679,0.0002198526,0.00005139459,0.0003010643,0.0002334615],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987537,0.0000985889,0.0002042376,0.00008952398,0.0004690549,0.0003849017],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002646768,0.0002012623,0.1347573,0.00008466282,0.0003719031,0.002077208,0.1902777,0.00001397832,0.001042718,0.1300432,0.5122111,0.02865425],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004892001,0.0006223879,0.01330705,0.0001284442,0.0001721698,0.0001049014,0.009857262,0.000005115401,0.002702125,0.01068348,0.9616919,0.000235952],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9678311,0.0008319031,0.00001090672,0.01702632,0.001329686,0.00007240543,0.00000961879,0.000002903725,0.01288513],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9983898,0.0000517345,0.000033234,0.0002599117,0.0009309905,2.879368e-7,1.313769e-7,0.000004508808,0.000329446],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4494807,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8741348,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W651559902","doi":"","title":"Youth crime and youth justice : comparative and cross-national perspectives","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":81,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminology; Economic Justice; Political science; Sociology; Psychology; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1470678600080893,"gpt":0.4097403561255992,"spread":0.26267249611751,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003751997,0.0001978231,0.0002697507,0.00006535524,0.0007646518,0.0003256724,0.0001455283,0.0001981871,0.0002086121],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001540596,0.0001814685,0.00004853906,0.00004778842,0.001678366,0.0003089243,0.00007397963,0.0002312893,0.00002608126],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004749756,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001730969,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002396544,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001302613,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985765,0.00005542919,0.0001649831,0.0004203731,0.0005588732,0.0002239055],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990826,0.0001799244,0.00009899156,0.00007453981,0.0004051542,0.0001587537],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001953174,0.00001520316,0.00003010792,0.00003156121,0.00002069238,0.000001225708,0.3377525,0.000002885307,2.51396e-7,0.6608223,0.001275484,0.00002818807],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000668443,0.0001728107,0.003730567,0.000423444,0.0008252458,0.000006986379,0.825232,0.000008817147,0.000005256478,0.07992517,0.08800044,0.00100084],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.001273171,0.003024831,0.00005199816,0.0003598157,0.0001351153,0.0002157636,0.0001725048,0.0000559623,0.9947109],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.3613708,0.0003414377,0.0001603109,0.0001193425,0.0005077849,0.000002058151,0.00002796141,0.000008934935,0.6374614],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5808972,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.740007,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1796572108","doi":"10.1017/cbo9780511979170","title":"Mitigation and Aggravation at Sentencing","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":80,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Legislature; Statutory law; Discretion; Political science; Law; Sentence; Sentencing guidelines; Criminology; Common law; Law and economics; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04085265482509632,"gpt":0.2358256628848379,"spread":0.1949730080597416,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0001929918,0.0001416731,0.0001627597,0.00007844746,0.0006886952,0.00004043045,0.0002022926,0.0002477748,0.000005995512],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003227623,0.000179573,0.00006592025,0.00001020711,0.0004502948,0.0001572283,0.0001731078,0.0001644163,0.00001177267],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005280569,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002250169,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005927064,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005663934,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990654,0.00009193247,0.00009727534,0.0002933877,0.0002473246,0.0002046981],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993191,0.00007622344,0.0001628967,0.0001576442,0.0001409467,0.000143166],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004362754,0.000003871558,0.00003475156,0.00008983852,0.00002581689,0.00006136066,0.002676751,1.295032e-7,0.00006855723,0.8647548,0.130059,0.002181533],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001112419,0.0000165914,0.0001074798,0.0001903231,0.0001187819,0.000003088721,0.0006713839,0.000005325902,0.0001444556,0.00003294105,0.9983938,0.000204544],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.004481595,0.0001420702,0.00006941464,0.00004810426,0.0001840102,0.0002452507,0.000027496,0.00007907106,0.994723],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.005756764,0.0002908249,0.00004771721,0.00003902384,0.0001649123,4.114933e-7,0.00003038017,0.00001145054,0.9936585],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8683349,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8959988,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W265319787","doi":"","title":"Crimes of Colour: Racialization and the Criminal Justice System in Canada","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Resources for feminist research","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":71,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Racialization; Criminalization; Criminology; Sociology; Criminal justice; Gender studies; Context (archaeology); Law; Political science; Race (biology); History","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1162398073225891,"gpt":0.3889562782725682,"spread":0.2727164709499791,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003391845,0.00005964634,0.0001673579,0.00007521778,0.0008324751,0.00008115209,0.0003191954,0.00004730675,0.00003589316],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001535822,0.00004503941,0.0000277298,0.0003418991,0.0008837138,0.00005029974,0.000059768,0.0001388664,0.000002119273],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003367989,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003851238,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8853891,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8758345,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979325,0.0005293731,0.0002345541,0.0001667945,0.0007628177,0.0003739562],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9968198,0.002686343,0.00006550007,0.0001320076,0.0002095929,0.00008675445],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001225571,0.00008325039,0.007978602,0.003559705,0.00002605962,0.00003460402,0.2625762,0.00005682671,0.00006865885,0.6885219,0.02455552,0.01131316],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001010737,0.0001234583,0.001841624,0.0003074082,0.0001213832,0.00000709854,0.5975698,0.004481534,0.0001233614,0.0003824488,0.3938791,0.0001520185],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8986816,0.002653196,0.00002262435,0.00412746,0.0001495266,0.0009439118,0.00002118653,0.00001434408,0.0933861],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9981934,0.0001862542,0.00003131173,0.00003539955,0.0001259334,0.00005038852,6.221682e-7,0.000006053706,0.001370625],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6881394,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.640281,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2085439619","doi":"10.1177/0964663910378434","title":"Between a Hunch and a Hard Place: Making Suspicion Reasonable at the Canadian Border","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Social & Legal Studies","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":65,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Discretion; Scrutiny; Objectivity (philosophy); Empirical research; Sociology; Law; Sketch; Law and economics; Epistemology; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06945951445316405,"gpt":0.408517035797288,"spread":0.3390575213441239,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009000844,0.0001061384,0.0001791192,0.00002408555,0.007013061,0.0001929455,0.0001664875,0.0001106245,0.0001025104],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005550058,0.00008141555,0.00005185393,0.0001673366,0.0009973187,0.000181415,0.0001206762,0.0002814124,0.00002860159],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002742153,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003209634,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5493609,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.988827,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987997,0.0001011361,0.000114834,0.000198921,0.0003279255,0.0004574356],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993983,0.000228896,0.0000531881,0.00007790914,0.0001424834,0.00009920314],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00005740852,0.00002145668,0.143748,0.0000671496,0.0002929088,0.00003976698,0.2926924,8.78395e-7,0.0001151106,0.2683696,0.2592057,0.0353896],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007101588,0.00001378912,0.0511352,0.00001447173,0.00004905014,7.514859e-7,0.02040632,4.226891e-7,0.000006705495,0.001220742,0.9269611,0.0001203905],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8199268,0.001633081,5.980103e-7,0.1172727,0.0004290979,0.000246223,0.00001210833,0.00004389085,0.06043547],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9877925,0.00009955459,0.00002476219,0.0003811382,0.001241463,0.00002110643,0.000001283543,0.00000803993,0.01043018],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6677554,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9942797,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1538339521","doi":"","title":"The Criminal Cases Review Commission: Hope for the Innocent?","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Bristol Research (University of Bristol)","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":53,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Commission; Criminal justice; Criminal case; Economic Justice; Test (biology); Criminal trial; Index (typography); Criminology; Law; Political science; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.3043360029925013,"gpt":0.4566867510715336,"spread":0.1523507480790323,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.007355594,0.0002212236,0.0005364614,0.0001143161,0.01385358,0.0002474853,0.004574672,0.0002705458,0.0003103196],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004652834,0.0001771398,0.0004458319,0.0001959569,0.006527927,0.000302025,0.0007774881,0.0009744692,0.0001306915],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0008102172,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00436215,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02050345,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02763312,"domain_scores_codex":[0.99582,0.0007303758,0.0002599263,0.000475449,0.001970755,0.0007435154],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9908368,0.005049869,0.0005315428,0.001307976,0.001973993,0.0002998325],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001642279,0.00002617996,0.00000455295,0.001091427,0.00004730912,0.0001249229,0.001088892,8.911075e-8,6.108271e-7,0.01962448,0.9073305,0.07049678],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001549833,0.0001438986,0.00006697546,0.003053253,0.0002633009,0.0000158638,0.006770782,0.000007049822,5.197953e-7,0.001942679,0.9873784,0.000202274],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.00003232072,0.1726907,0.0001703511,0.08751693,0.0005522259,0.003036309,0.0002283911,0.00005129228,0.7357215],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.001830659,0.1472776,0.00006960829,0.00008398324,0.0003620967,0.000005218515,0.00002512459,0.00002240042,0.8503234],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1146019,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9961757,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2169189483","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.46.2.107","title":"Wrongful Convictions: The American Experience","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":51,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Conviction; Publicity; Legislation; Political science; Law; Criminology; Criminal Conviction; Salience (neuroscience); Prison; Subject (documents); Psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1141885114976563,"gpt":0.3546432759040277,"spread":0.2404547644063714,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.002422558,0.0003674924,0.0005855294,0.0004867384,0.001922981,0.0002724209,0.001262498,0.0003256479,0.000121795],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00730234,0.0003365965,0.0001933704,0.0002718532,0.005072634,0.0005259266,0.00006338732,0.001322397,0.00001906142],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001841716,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008233098,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1972258,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4388393,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9958801,0.0008053223,0.0006909847,0.0004464049,0.0001967581,0.001980399],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99464,0.001717044,0.0006232702,0.0004291177,0.00061898,0.001971573],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002501218,0.0000768499,0.001942706,0.0005541902,0.0001154392,0.005233201,0.2831289,0.00101571,0.0004327659,0.6874718,0.001484154,0.01829412],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006409438,0.0008038742,0.03747417,0.0003194335,0.005672026,0.009082143,0.8696877,0.0000284099,0.0001587183,0.01610783,0.0594068,0.0006179709],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9607174,0.002091165,0.002240715,0.02705613,0.0008930758,0.0001956462,0.00001597943,0.00003774741,0.006752121],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9893205,0.002204885,0.002163221,0.005278209,0.0007125728,0.00002705609,0.000002406503,0.00003240296,0.0002587978],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6713639,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999086,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3040873337","doi":"10.2307/jj.17610838.13","title":"A Human Rights-Based Approach to Data Protection in Canada","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa | University of Ottawa Press eBooks","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":50,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Big data; Data Protection Act 1998; Data science; Computer science; Internet privacy; Human rights; Analytics; The Internet; Digital rights; Internet of Things; Data analysis; Computer security; Political science; World Wide Web; Data mining; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.069253950882884,"gpt":0.2414035113902561,"spread":0.1721495605073721,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003403071,0.0004296244,0.0006520759,0.0002463768,0.0009829544,0.00006017098,0.002988096,0.0004632531,0.0004093747],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003638518,0.0005699947,0.0001484691,0.00006587807,0.0004436972,0.0002985597,0.0008218975,0.0007672332,0.000007366077],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001480668,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001622975,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9836639,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9886951,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9970397,0.0002275356,0.000329915,0.000992787,0.0008778431,0.0005322146],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9978237,0.0001067062,0.0004422874,0.0009574991,0.0002159766,0.0004538462],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0004639753,0.0001721134,0.0003039807,0.001493549,0.0004349937,0.001317362,0.01027571,0.001565898,0.0001893363,0.6202764,0.3551668,0.008339861],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005260857,0.00007591976,0.0002303244,0.0003946354,0.0002663383,0.000002619374,0.001138062,0.000423422,0.0000660041,0.0006547231,0.995627,0.000594854],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001963604,0.0001516162,0.00175608,0.0006401449,0.0001223014,0.001124909,0.0003701079,0.000106765,0.9955317],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.616733,0.00006265199,0.002320971,0.0001836301,0.0002814702,0.000003142445,0.0003053771,0.00009768053,0.3800121],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6404602,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996752,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1996793615","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.46.2.121","title":"Showing Remorse: Reflections on the Gap between Expression and Attribution in Cases of Wrongful Conviction","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":44,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Remorse; Conviction; Criminal Conviction; Psychology; Disposition; Criminal justice; Attribution; Expression (computer science); Criminology; Inclusion (mineral); Social psychology; Political science; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.2878678158405966,"gpt":0.3872231436201995,"spread":0.09935532777960288,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002588659,0.0002430387,0.0004520757,0.0005658508,0.0008978593,0.0000841317,0.0003989672,0.0004331312,0.00004132773],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007602981,0.0002240924,0.00008693493,0.0002104466,0.001357702,0.0003532818,0.00003761138,0.001016912,0.000002086947],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00111606,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002930593,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06755915,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2707061,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9971717,0.0007497573,0.0006112145,0.0003226837,0.0001394823,0.001005172],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9958176,0.002352394,0.0003960543,0.0002298133,0.0004002435,0.0008039093],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0004979767,0.000114181,0.007707837,0.001623091,0.00009500021,0.004113793,0.1558616,0.001621993,0.006304984,0.812161,0.0006469578,0.009251618],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001738324,0.002262399,0.1419931,0.002864287,0.007902654,0.007056859,0.7843532,0.0000378673,0.004219707,0.03442221,0.01226347,0.0008858774],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9834163,0.0009956425,0.001239452,0.01205983,0.0004050531,0.0001814674,0.00002265872,0.00001328665,0.001666347],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.997101,0.0009874641,0.0008285369,0.0006789776,0.0003256151,0.00000984602,0.000004369269,0.00001702889,0.00004714039],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7777387,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9386501,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3126101507","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199296064.013.0041","title":"Comparative Criminal Law","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"reference-entry","venue":"","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":44,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal law; Law; Principle of legality; Comparative law; Section (typography); Political science; Criminal procedure; Parochialism; Public law; Context (archaeology); Criminal jurisdiction; Jurisdiction; Geography; Business","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1392640208775994,"gpt":0.3969144351709777,"spread":0.2576504142933784,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002811037,0.0002405582,0.0004767862,0.00005355624,0.0007111494,0.0002162457,0.0004916918,0.000373024,0.00255004],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000262773,0.0002082562,0.0001584287,0.0001364697,0.000706278,0.0001943766,0.00006875096,0.0004141457,0.0008834586],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001934866,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005085143,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1217439,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.137743,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979429,0.0001928088,0.0002635294,0.0003755503,0.0007404924,0.0004847315],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990827,0.0002491055,0.0001268547,0.0002091994,0.0001742187,0.0001579363],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000005130972,0.00002734569,0.000005600813,0.00004648476,0.000008846796,0.000008865275,0.001609143,3.404167e-7,5.263946e-8,0.3385632,0.658242,0.001483042],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004875892,0.00003075884,0.0000392267,0.0001988913,0.000106313,0.000001267376,0.00364227,0.000001126909,0.000008093607,0.003227266,0.9924096,0.000286389],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001309596,0.002489417,0.00006135929,0.0009585057,0.001143318,0.0002053205,0.00003999516,0.0001215148,0.9948496],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.05736313,0.006461298,0.0004167134,0.0004968932,0.002523742,0.00002159484,0.0001400681,0.00001554728,0.932561],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3353359,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998944,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2885547096","doi":"","title":"Omnibus Bills in Theory and Practice","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian parliamentary review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":43,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Repeal; House of Commons; State (computer science); Law and economics; Commons; Public administration; Political science; Law; Economics; Parliament; Politics; Computer science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03544045504200584,"gpt":0.3541252779583814,"spread":0.3186848229163756,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001876487,0.0000762592,0.0001552907,0.00004868806,0.0001593802,0.00006112664,0.000148313,0.00003334791,0.002971267],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001053053,0.00006975303,0.00002479844,0.0001968681,0.0001608583,0.0005621345,0.00001361904,0.00009141099,0.000429545],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002394153,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003709093,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8521123,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8187518,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986033,0.0006166577,0.0001663218,0.0001681811,0.0001254857,0.0003199903],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998832,0.0005033006,0.00004267828,0.0001365709,0.00004188881,0.000443558],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000008738199,0.00003213447,0.006556793,0.0007685809,0.00002333652,0.0001325687,0.004500247,2.13143e-7,0.000009737237,0.0641745,0.3932428,0.5305504],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003890697,0.00001222889,0.001819151,0.00105471,0.00002798359,0.000009633445,0.003748109,2.533453e-7,5.122442e-7,0.001784762,0.9913998,0.0001039487],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.01960741,0.5525748,0.000004221827,0.2728183,0.000332819,0.002032656,0.00001446753,0.00002974427,0.1525856],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.3749112,0.5038444,0.0004005452,0.1182542,0.0001739096,0.0001714648,0.000009632187,0.00001665,0.002217998],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.598157,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9979401,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2413819913","doi":"","title":"Criminalization confusion and concerns: the decade since the Cuerrier decision.","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"PubMed","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":41,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminalization; Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV); Confusion; Supreme court; Criminology; Law; Psychology; Political science; Medicine; Family medicine","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0635375325936003,"gpt":0.3279187207725473,"spread":0.264381188178947,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001060102,0.0000633485,0.00006691739,0.00001383748,0.0009434109,0.0001803042,0.0002729007,0.00004780601,0.00002954749],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0008980411,0.00003406389,0.00002654952,0.0001541612,0.0003672494,0.0001959036,0.00003309523,0.00008139144,0.000007525509],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003445097,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003547954,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007214413,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008209661,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990101,0.0001365956,0.0001197098,0.0001457812,0.0003399525,0.0002478602],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991717,0.0004723225,0.00005362836,0.0001526549,0.00006512845,0.00008454423],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004444947,0.00001635742,0.0009759932,0.000002457551,0.000003445873,0.000002940419,0.01114163,0.000008102546,0.00001276251,0.1878121,0.01161822,0.7883615],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001286157,0.00001515374,0.2676779,0.00001715673,0.00003800211,0.000003757963,0.004728437,0.00005150052,0.00007084928,0.02288481,0.7042778,0.0001060332],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.5973625,0.008356917,0.005746928,0.3099112,0.001213653,0.002906061,0.000005783068,0.00018433,0.07431261],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9952295,0.0007184316,0.0000340047,0.002859852,0.0002435882,0.00006904773,5.233866e-7,0.000002881027,0.0008421245],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7882555,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7256049,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2084741629","doi":"10.1111/j.1754-7121.2001.tb00891.x","title":"The notwithstanding mechanism and public discussion: Lessons from the ignored practice of section 33 of the Charter","year":2001,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Public Administration","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":40,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Charter; Political science; Philosophy; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06016539205398035,"gpt":0.3195389679592179,"spread":0.2593735759052375,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001360868,0.0001306332,0.000133221,0.00003954058,0.002018167,0.0004596517,0.0004275405,0.0001693101,0.0001841103],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001656968,0.00006682701,0.00007480763,0.0006229808,0.0008729798,0.001099361,0.00003850346,0.0002484233,0.000003411897],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002642898,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002315096,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08596428,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9083581,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979458,0.0006193809,0.0003453193,0.0002320273,0.0004543337,0.0004030879],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9978889,0.0007342798,0.0004074021,0.0003533986,0.0002968962,0.0003191671],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002158503,0.00003238808,0.001869856,0.0000102195,0.00003883111,0.000004136782,0.004297892,1.91677e-7,0.00009264524,0.9681056,0.004437417,0.0210892],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001167152,0.00009609775,0.003848885,0.00008441058,0.00009529627,0.000032486,0.06029281,0.0002007575,0.00007565666,0.01074696,0.924292,0.0001179829],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.09011932,0.0007959287,0.0003485635,0.9021953,0.001848104,0.0003554291,0.0001353297,0.000007639599,0.004194337],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9960971,0.0005032855,0.00003072138,0.0006003286,0.000571173,0.00001452657,0.00001232129,0.000009105688,0.002161437],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9573587,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999281,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2258436064","doi":"10.3138/utlj.3244","title":"Polycentricity and queue jumping in public law remedies: A two-track response","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Toronto Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":38,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Polycentricity; Context (archaeology); Jurisdiction; Adjudication; Law; Political science; Sociology; Negotiation; Legislature; Law and economics; Interpretation (philosophy); Economics; Corporate governance","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05971884230427966,"gpt":0.3008158458132109,"spread":0.2410970035089312,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002234526,0.00006415355,0.0001482853,0.00002968585,0.0006386543,0.00007252562,0.0003436946,0.00006066533,0.0001664875],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004059785,0.00007212557,0.00004572536,0.00005880602,0.0004418496,0.001334835,0.0001049267,0.0001480517,0.00000348405],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0007014588,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002574353,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4850567,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8574675,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986783,0.0004632393,0.0001215963,0.0001194877,0.0003558843,0.0002614413],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990768,0.0001595762,0.0001140227,0.0001044127,0.0001973207,0.0003478793],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.003477872,0.0002326864,0.01486416,0.00002585993,0.00005419033,0.0005932883,0.15668,0.00002140911,0.0004467692,0.8125607,0.00711498,0.003928056],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00187979,0.0002079906,0.005875916,0.0001629856,0.00003604771,0.00005494075,0.1769585,0.00004677506,0.00003916629,0.003719812,0.8107862,0.0002318743],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.823656,0.001757193,0.00009102748,0.01158392,0.0003102811,0.0001068645,0.000003282743,0.00002455274,0.1624669],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9984505,0.0003823473,0.0006070663,0.0001051696,0.00008890171,2.012674e-8,1.673469e-7,0.000002573476,0.0003633069],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8088409,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5183724,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1556715205","doi":"","title":"Wrongful Convictions in Canada","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Cincinnati law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":34,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Plea; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Law; Political science; Compensation (psychology); Homicide; Criminology; Sociology; Human rights; Poison control; Suicide prevention; Psychology; Fundamental rights","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05866183048251948,"gpt":0.2479129312765329,"spread":0.1892511007940134,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002702044,0.00004079462,0.0001517436,0.00001613192,0.0001432302,0.000001415767,0.0002166825,0.00001834512,0.001924343],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003895458,0.000047011,0.00003433314,0.0001810719,0.0001438955,0.0001365742,0.00002593443,0.00005610561,0.00001717092],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002637835,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007651764,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9967977,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9993336,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9994309,0.00009734458,0.00009535037,0.00008691793,0.0001693824,0.0001200869],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996459,0.00004257081,0.00006260218,0.000102805,0.00008072967,0.00006541138],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000008226129,0.00004001689,0.006089615,0.000589128,0.0000112203,0.0000881283,0.00455697,7.621015e-7,0.000002700765,0.971589,0.0116835,0.005340694],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006382511,0.000008530349,0.003563232,0.0007513154,0.00002887924,8.260546e-7,0.002386333,0.000001385021,0.000006178978,0.0002181439,0.9929055,0.00006587931],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02597325,0.01204702,0.00004552223,0.005245215,0.0001701105,0.0003723874,0.00001151278,0.00002140285,0.9561136],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9803203,0.01830928,0.0001736322,0.0005070539,0.00000693827,1.069798e-7,8.581962e-7,0.000001727402,0.0006800431],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.981222,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.998988,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2531591372","doi":"10.60082/2817-5069.1437","title":"The Ideal Victim, the Hysterical Complainant, and the Disclosure of Confidential Records: The Implications of the Charter for Sexual Assault Law","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Osgoode Hall law journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":34,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Jurisprudence; Supreme court; Political science; Sociology; Compromise; Charter","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0424104110898984,"gpt":0.3055980323655133,"spread":0.2631876212756149,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.002691051,0.0001266922,0.0002138524,0.000007550429,0.006686059,0.0003327915,0.001144046,0.00007546822,0.0000640791],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001945873,0.00004436521,0.0001998267,0.0001243861,0.003332427,0.0001732555,0.0001194093,0.0004302077,0.000003273364],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002809589,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00004115325,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02629154,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.265869,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9976822,0.000804759,0.0004669416,0.0001461676,0.0005655445,0.0003344456],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.996773,0.002020715,0.0004568089,0.0003976622,0.000280834,0.0000709883],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007787759,0.00003512917,0.0003773725,0.000008580737,0.00005701797,3.934204e-7,0.006792627,0.000006443644,0.0001075192,0.9865824,0.004222263,0.001732388],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002655925,0.0004221381,0.01645885,0.0001971091,0.0007443283,0.0005768725,0.05204797,0.0008852173,0.0002137528,0.2258136,0.6995667,0.0004175728],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.05998076,0.003763199,0.001578814,0.5782844,0.002260432,0.002773577,0.0001939111,0.00003518226,0.3511297],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9980813,0.0002598217,0.00003060619,0.0005922964,0.0004993671,0.00003736474,5.580772e-7,0.000009857034,0.0004888513],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9381005,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9993799,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1798828826","doi":"10.1017/cbo9781139962964.004","title":"Enough About Me: Why Privacy is About Power, not Consent (or Harm)","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":27,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Harm; Internet privacy; Computer security; Psychology; Computer science; Social psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07493607685941893,"gpt":0.2876754027174099,"spread":0.2127393258579909,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004404473,0.0005386984,0.0006896555,0.0001673092,0.001115487,0.0002197375,0.001443415,0.0006674653,0.000294811],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001348237,0.0005851733,0.0004253248,0.00001876948,0.001389725,0.0001889844,0.0005810027,0.0006447841,0.0001874115],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004490516,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007974142,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006682062,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002493427,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9969924,0.0001701385,0.0003457924,0.0008808663,0.00090422,0.0007065799],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973491,0.0004574196,0.0004327184,0.0008374786,0.0003998764,0.0005234202],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002132383,0.00001038519,0.000001988762,0.00009922324,0.00008355428,0.0002335729,0.002301263,2.078969e-7,0.00001999756,0.6796952,0.3165559,0.0007854514],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004656763,0.00008743373,0.00002068559,0.0005679857,0.0003246044,0.00001011079,0.0004632505,0.000003713148,0.0002164523,0.00002555544,0.9970851,0.0007294413],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.0002603946,0.0003435985,0.0003324698,0.00132335,0.0008032717,0.0006959792,0.0003905623,0.0002273077,0.9956231],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.009457755,0.001227767,0.0000959013,0.001951104,0.0004267387,0.00000149945,0.00002156018,0.00005592718,0.9867617],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6805292,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999325,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2581992304","doi":"","title":"Omnibus Bills: Constitutional Constraints and Legislative Liberations","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":27,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Parliament; Separation of powers; Legislature; House of Commons; Political science; Democracy; Law; Politics; Judicial deference; Legislation; Doctrine; Law and economics; Judicial review; Public administration; Economics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02276897726288724,"gpt":0.3046797585109426,"spread":0.2819107812480554,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001398759,0.00007503478,0.00008984427,0.00005036316,0.0009297357,0.00008344379,0.0001195725,0.00005384782,0.0002511464],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003906,0.00005066191,0.00004283225,0.00008868756,0.002990734,0.000498856,0.00001588586,0.0003684556,0.00004831698],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004631131,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004458076,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000193799,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003937492,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982897,0.0001275361,0.0001498925,0.0001313913,0.0002511566,0.001050314],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.999386,0.0002374543,0.00007379059,0.00005095322,0.0001285782,0.000123243],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000008953015,0.00001188938,0.00109528,4.695111e-7,0.00002447774,0.000002583185,0.001101339,3.708313e-7,0.0002068688,0.9694853,0.0002291113,0.0278333],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005963481,0.0001434284,0.00056407,0.00007808324,0.00003677971,0.000448383,0.00964442,0.000002021178,0.00005033406,0.8658305,0.1223991,0.0002064711],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2643794,0.00878959,0.2747174,0.1666356,0.001643735,0.0006861172,0.00005485491,0.0002016937,0.2828916],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.990866,0.004666249,0.0001083037,0.0001022243,0.0003527494,0.000002727343,4.077961e-7,0.000003173293,0.003898182],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7264866,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997225,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2201423329","doi":"","title":"Wrongful Convictions: Adversarial and Inquisitorial Themes","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"North Carolina Journal of International Law","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":26,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Adversarial system; Adversary; Criminal justice; Law; Identification (biology); Political science; Psychology; Economic Justice; Computer science; Computer security","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01292478191664596,"gpt":0.3062719541755838,"spread":0.2933471722589379,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004791567,0.00007592427,0.0001299542,0.00006860458,0.0002856058,0.00009447509,0.0003241955,0.00007960048,0.0003854547],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004117878,0.00006654303,0.00009275719,0.0000588714,0.0003858779,0.0005608019,0.00003890811,0.0003426179,0.00001625948],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004442933,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001630261,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001237631,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00936678,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988277,0.00005139229,0.0002976214,0.00009627813,0.0005912628,0.0001357614],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987399,0.0001969444,0.0002313693,0.00006738283,0.0006235004,0.000140878],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003732516,0.00008464274,0.1070805,0.000005509048,0.0001057657,0.00005591535,0.005165603,0.0000186986,0.0006046408,0.880012,0.004084656,0.002408805],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00065133,0.00009323476,0.01631514,0.00002274596,0.00004524704,0.00009745431,0.0006135281,0.00001279973,0.0001240892,0.005354229,0.9765606,0.0001096294],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9366944,0.0001680334,0.00008076709,0.005549172,0.02208751,0.00007360658,0.00001408496,0.00001469736,0.03531767],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9879813,0.0001778913,0.0005149019,0.0001893828,0.01090896,0.000001085043,0.00000238033,0.000005258151,0.0002188223],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9724759,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5226883,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2738361053","doi":"10.1525/nclr.2017.20.3.391","title":"Mandatory Sentencing Around the World and the Need for Reform","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"New Criminal Law Review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Arbitrariness; Doctrine; Proportionality (law); Jurisprudence; Law; Political science; Relevance (law); Criminal justice; Philosophy","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.09892597009970915,"gpt":0.3910029223963675,"spread":0.2920769522966583,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002772613,0.0001280769,0.000304153,0.000009758382,0.003778182,0.000425198,0.0007819086,0.0000321667,0.00006382824],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005176642,0.00006343255,0.0001609968,0.00004953455,0.001275924,0.0003851219,0.0001256939,0.0001528702,0.00002504483],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007875207,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000125727,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.04289961,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.07545374,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987842,0.0001446242,0.0002463909,0.0002092925,0.0003085758,0.000306929],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985692,0.0004171037,0.0002266561,0.0005749071,0.00008826819,0.0001238585],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004794306,0.00000456442,0.0000179659,0.0006308769,0.00001089213,0.000001886549,0.0008598914,2.709113e-8,0.000002110631,0.9516627,0.01259379,0.03416735],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002792809,0.00001788276,0.0001299326,0.001628766,0.00037672,0.000007648018,0.001969661,0.000004964847,0.000007314727,0.007498538,0.9879759,0.0001034102],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.003699927,0.1619989,0.0001361311,0.4228654,0.0009976276,0.002888304,0.000007460551,0.00006677239,0.4073395],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7922515,0.1194316,0.0009087757,0.04951175,0.003698593,0.0002756354,0.000004789039,0.00004403729,0.03387335],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9753821,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975188,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2260291965","doi":"","title":"“The Relevance of Prior Record in the Criminal Law: A Response to the Theory of Professor von Hirsch”","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Queen's law journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Relevance (law); Criminal law; Criminology; Law; Psychology; Psychoanalysis; Philosophy; Sociology; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04442344463517078,"gpt":0.3273808466940629,"spread":0.2829574020588921,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01070274,0.000114744,0.0001944174,0.00003702524,0.001580318,0.0001196471,0.001130391,0.00007107951,0.0001370792],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002113764,0.00005730705,0.000129994,0.0003118855,0.0008441299,0.0002522671,0.00006063339,0.0005400546,0.00002594978],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008561995,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001033633,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003663763,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01937757,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9950673,0.003075137,0.0005211922,0.0001471118,0.000778685,0.0004105499],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9955549,0.003439217,0.0003313363,0.0003590067,0.0002244693,0.00009110244],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002243875,0.0001254157,0.0002108093,0.00002555697,0.00001670091,0.0000376698,0.06446055,0.00001013822,0.0002780379,0.899727,0.007334201,0.02553001],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003354304,0.0005269823,0.00325914,0.0003931221,0.00006640797,0.00004569033,0.06299404,0.00000919568,0.0004524347,0.03560707,0.8961433,0.000167258],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7835369,0.001110196,0.0001259586,0.1793105,0.0008610647,0.0007832946,0.000007575652,0.00001696891,0.03424763],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99502,0.0004318982,0.0002530365,0.0009637876,0.0002855674,0.00001906384,6.183929e-8,0.000009363039,0.003017167],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.888809,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997195,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1495532371","doi":"10.5040/9781472561091","title":"Rethinking Criminal Law Theory","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) eBooks","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal law; Law; Political science; Philosophy of law; Comparative law; Criminology; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07231684435059137,"gpt":0.3014732633426873,"spread":0.2291564189920959,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts","scholarly_communication","research_integrity","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["research_integrity"],"category_scores_codex":[0.009574037,0.0007481259,0.0008566669,0.0003200413,0.002571238,0.005469497,0.002694988,0.001825418,0.002475217],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001644105,0.0007744384,0.0005635195,0.0001064788,0.001895698,0.001856936,0.0006554564,0.002802352,0.000298021],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0008519281,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002193949,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005031822,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006210159,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9931669,0.0008374457,0.0008576728,0.001025712,0.002353795,0.001758462],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9954283,0.001371413,0.0007220892,0.001104473,0.0005407339,0.0008330066],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003873534,0.00001667294,0.00001487632,0.000143075,0.00007307799,0.00006692483,0.02552318,3.181295e-7,0.000009193727,0.8076117,0.1561236,0.01037863],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001277976,0.00002886817,0.00001020877,0.0005825452,0.0003972722,0.00001805757,0.0009993748,2.998477e-7,0.00001523191,0.3832823,0.6139376,0.0006004575],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.0002449786,0.003851834,0.00008653983,0.001627941,0.003472181,0.0005895986,0.00004327268,0.0005243724,0.9895593],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.08807459,0.00009516646,0.0006344995,0.004391002,0.008680485,0.00005457058,0.00009711755,0.0001542536,0.8978183],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.457814,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994982,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2148442110","doi":"","title":"The Grudge Informer Case Revisited","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"TSpace (University of Toronto)","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Principle of legality; Philosophy of law; Political science; Presentation (obstetrics); Political philosophy; Sociology; Politics; Comparative law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03791083770159604,"gpt":0.2899185551775086,"spread":0.2520077174759126,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002676682,0.00004908369,0.00008688435,0.000007839963,0.001798883,0.00001089451,0.00024605,0.00004639766,0.004003583],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006940147,0.00004669817,0.00006733987,0.00005953734,0.0005197288,0.0005247008,0.00005642586,0.00005039733,0.00004967083],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001375381,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00009161833,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5873306,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4753581,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9994211,0.00006211376,0.00004555272,0.00008633617,0.0002046436,0.0001802413],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994666,0.0001195557,0.00006700616,0.0001600163,0.00009677068,0.00009004892],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003122943,0.00008981869,0.005552245,0.00004195724,0.00009648344,0.00252034,0.5718098,0.00000479901,0.0001825321,0.1151269,0.1081697,0.1960931],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002275903,0.00006312104,0.04886419,0.00002123287,0.00003711332,0.0000986327,0.1862671,0.00002713155,0.000008055817,0.00003132859,0.7642047,0.0001497696],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4616701,0.0009718628,0.00007744861,0.006401135,0.0001020952,0.0001308437,0.000002903235,0.00004567477,0.5305979],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9764097,0.00217148,0.0002158855,0.00003444027,0.00003859248,5.596651e-8,5.128185e-7,0.000002037999,0.02112732],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.656035,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995006,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2157995933","doi":"10.1177/1362480614568746","title":"Post-Soviet criminal justice: The persistence of distorted neo-inquisitorialism","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Theoretical Criminology","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":24,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal justice; Persistence (discontinuity); Economic Justice; Political science; Criminology; Power (physics); Law; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1456656845259538,"gpt":0.3623384010337559,"spread":0.2166727165078021,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001419586,0.0001598162,0.0002971616,0.00005134133,0.0004201766,0.00004147977,0.0008924201,0.0002188783,0.0007802099],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004181571,0.0001131865,0.0001307149,0.0001378319,0.007981029,0.0001257959,0.0001597841,0.0002887153,0.0001616696],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000078734,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003744624,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00134638,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001124394,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9974791,0.0007326006,0.0003387039,0.0002978913,0.0005965205,0.0005551385],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9976266,0.0009410802,0.000119903,0.0004300006,0.0005898714,0.0002925396],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002969145,0.00004494465,0.00004387139,0.00003517947,0.00001264761,0.00001742985,0.03762078,0.000002006629,0.0003817944,0.9577278,0.002378745,0.001437896],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001017774,0.001691809,0.0008676305,0.00007853097,0.002907549,0.00009510762,0.3863851,0.000133714,0.001090153,0.4523367,0.1526888,0.0007071408],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8345178,0.000906605,0.00110025,0.03076516,0.006692467,0.0004412076,0.00002556624,0.0001614233,0.1253895],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9973297,0.00005420523,0.0002831737,0.0006842801,0.0013009,0.000008686532,0.000004353029,0.00001185919,0.000322903],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5053911,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9947187,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2258099037","doi":"10.29173/alr382","title":"Improving Wrongful Conviction Review: Lessons from a Comparative Analysis of Continental Criminal Procedure","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Alberta Law Review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":23,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Conviction; Appeal; Criminal justice; Political science; Law; Criminology; Economic Justice; Order (exchange); Criminal law; Sociology; Business","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1053995524662607,"gpt":0.4042746286968665,"spread":0.2988750762306058,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009225975,0.0001688165,0.0009714171,0.00003687753,0.0001796879,0.00003265606,0.0003153261,0.00006062531,0.000441434],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009020105,0.0001437801,0.0002791393,0.000889271,0.0003048305,0.0003557953,0.00005548829,0.0001242077,0.00008210675],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008893447,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002259802,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2220922,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.200786,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979965,0.0003740163,0.0005604901,0.0003417617,0.0004788901,0.0002483218],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982257,0.000371378,0.0004454331,0.000294146,0.0004537913,0.000209528],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002006864,0.0008779108,0.01074407,0.02945939,0.003331258,0.00002464373,0.04879105,0.00001364936,0.0004263665,0.732868,0.1508547,0.02240834],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002352446,0.00009230649,0.0008569863,0.01587446,0.01349015,0.000002973223,0.002514037,0.0001236134,0.00007966527,0.0001103137,0.9662337,0.0003865962],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02973144,0.8552083,0.00009742521,0.02864748,0.0003749344,0.001947687,0.00006965151,0.00005624704,0.08386687],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8999139,0.09516551,0.0001971001,0.00370033,0.0001160026,0.00007224576,0.0001237453,0.000008650022,0.000702513],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8701825,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8137975,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1555190754","doi":"10.1017/cbo9780511493683.014","title":"The post-9/11 migration of Britain's Terrorism Act 2000","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"book-chapter","venue":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":23,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Terrorism; Globe; Political science; Law; Politics; Political economy; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03854392250976334,"gpt":0.2594798371329847,"spread":0.2209359146232213,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005137685,0.0002006111,0.0002405248,0.00009472686,0.0008189967,0.00006121095,0.0006663289,0.0003468792,0.000009218164],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005101363,0.0001957983,0.00022425,0.00001227433,0.0008917564,0.0001402863,0.0001400677,0.000286208,0.0000105289],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002915523,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004120118,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03030135,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007708724,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986073,0.00007700994,0.000204263,0.000282018,0.0005105791,0.0003188456],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985406,0.0002789696,0.0002918933,0.0003585632,0.0003841932,0.0001458174],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009867169,0.000005919002,0.00001411619,0.00002827653,0.00003664604,0.00006873209,0.001281052,3.154871e-7,0.00002710757,0.9688351,0.02514474,0.00445931],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001079923,0.00004158771,0.0001211381,0.0001176915,0.0001286322,0.000002330297,0.001068328,0.00000275204,0.00008938994,0.00002065458,0.9980878,0.0002117192],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.002233572,0.0002393992,0.00004743678,0.0003806426,0.000283065,0.0003445797,0.00007096995,0.00005379432,0.9963465],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.02415296,0.000305501,0.00002370062,0.00006162182,0.0002234493,2.648566e-7,0.00001433337,0.00001681928,0.9752014],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9729431,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9761559,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3041054523","doi":"","title":"Committing to Justice: The Case for Impact of Race and Culture Assessments in Sentencing African Canadian Offenders","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"eYLS (Yale Law School)","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Race (biology); Criminology; Economic Justice; Political science; Law; Criminal justice; Legal culture; Psychology; Sociology; Gender studies","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05734236290949063,"gpt":0.3685529271919873,"spread":0.3112105642824967,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006066515,0.0000911379,0.0001590663,0.0000263903,0.0005884037,0.0001045687,0.0001994018,0.00005257962,0.00003007312],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007674394,0.0000695582,0.00005662139,0.0002875197,0.0001083355,0.0002017511,0.00003982292,0.0001664606,0.000003575781],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002228121,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003507537,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8263558,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9332325,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990419,0.0001272025,0.0001668177,0.000184966,0.0001346385,0.0003444911],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989979,0.000240569,0.00006279165,0.0001039477,0.00007886076,0.0005158989],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0005094839,0.0001390486,0.1365108,0.000935555,0.0002732886,0.001608784,0.6055026,0.002614422,0.003862077,0.119991,0.1107235,0.01732945],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001168115,0.0007213224,0.0113471,0.0003146489,0.0002858149,0.00006663057,0.8433881,0.002436719,0.0001967487,0.001398307,0.1379815,0.0006949607],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9669231,0.0001681482,0.0001245184,0.02564982,0.000106293,0.000597091,0.00005248606,0.00001711778,0.006361477],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9976233,0.00001273223,0.0005762503,0.001528381,0.0001287402,0.00001397114,0.000001573752,0.000007093117,0.0001079727],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2378855,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4525585,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1970983722","doi":"10.1350/clwr.33.1.35.25831","title":"The Law in Undercover Policing: A Comparative Study of Entrapment and Covert Interviewing in Australia, Canada and Europe","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Common Law World Review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Covert; Entrapment; Interview; Law; Political science; Perspective (graphical); Criminology; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1372774496885587,"gpt":0.4025959515357165,"spread":0.2653185018471578,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007279835,0.00008899799,0.0003262415,0.00001582497,0.0001665455,0.00004251652,0.0001654897,0.000009958418,0.00001129714],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00001831328,0.00006416014,0.00001569094,0.0003166122,0.0002297619,0.0001132692,0.00007946812,0.0001280706,9.256021e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001459488,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008651078,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9705096,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9996932,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987726,0.0003767725,0.0003358311,0.0001369457,0.0001944142,0.0001834912],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994897,0.000216199,0.00008213075,0.0001269794,0.00002531032,0.00005970312],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002829785,0.0003272888,0.04024959,0.001157784,0.00003331275,0.00005183476,0.02854167,0.0000366784,0.000007712702,0.9257706,0.001328028,0.002467172],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001194809,0.0002222424,0.06376894,0.01836609,0.0001033993,0.000005028555,0.01090926,0.000002570312,0.00003909053,0.004675653,0.9003119,0.0004009613],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9281564,0.05176073,3.493145e-7,0.007529308,0.00008160572,0.0009223752,0.000001835256,0.000004838176,0.01154255],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9838983,0.01488804,0.000003636868,0.0009970346,0.000008360195,0.00001114254,3.163587e-7,0.000002729465,0.0001904198],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.921095,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2616375,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1527184592","doi":"","title":"A Flawed Compass: A Human Rights Analysis of the Roadmap to Strengthening Public Safety","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Political science; Public administration; Scrutiny; Accountability; Government (linguistics); Mandate; Law; Public relations","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04969152503861261,"gpt":0.352417466790031,"spread":0.3027259417514184,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000583828,0.0000685799,0.0002009504,0.0001185802,0.001000071,0.00007644319,0.0004751414,0.00003749313,0.0007629736],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009046451,0.0000433003,0.0001811305,0.001470636,0.0001076125,0.0001463088,0.00003712535,0.00006245678,0.00001138076],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000593117,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003951558,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01316171,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1429061,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988006,0.0001585359,0.0002328126,0.000160628,0.0004147458,0.0002326227],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993479,0.000101294,0.00007519254,0.0002530045,0.0001027032,0.0001199094],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001145623,0.00008017524,0.003235771,0.00000160565,0.0001280819,8.683727e-7,0.01223124,0.0001419107,0.0003997578,0.9772071,0.00306206,0.003499981],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003288142,0.0001795948,0.3317191,0.00007124747,0.001055132,3.896737e-7,0.008457173,0.001060635,0.0007523523,0.0131482,0.6427373,0.0004900885],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7999701,0.00001555837,0.0003338633,0.02142416,0.00006082825,0.0001653969,0.000003992995,0.00005602712,0.1779701],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9969123,7.776135e-7,0.0002215229,0.0003212026,0.00004710005,0.000001700891,0.000001672944,0.000001436071,0.002492316],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9640589,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9934098,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2588436416","doi":"","title":"Disenfranchisement as Punishment: European Court of Human Rights, UK and Canadian Responses to Prisoner Voting","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick)","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Human rights; Political science; Law; Fundamental rights; International human rights law; Voting; European union; European Union law; Convention; Parliament; Politics; Economics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.065308629649263,"gpt":0.3582365544041626,"spread":0.2929279247548996,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003005581,0.0001385025,0.0002800908,0.0004413496,0.005732282,0.0001136367,0.001241079,0.00005119045,0.0006484366],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005525682,0.0001562721,0.00009876221,0.0001640427,0.002613257,0.0003543122,0.000653644,0.0003199775,0.0000694195],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009587864,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005315058,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7721367,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8231905,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9969401,0.0006819089,0.0002105332,0.0004298529,0.0009939929,0.0007436216],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977048,0.0002391823,0.0001967548,0.0005175935,0.0003149579,0.001026698],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001245848,0.0004397428,0.2630936,0.0003572186,0.0003234849,0.002740908,0.2114135,0.000008348715,0.008783786,0.4214658,0.07475212,0.01537573],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009448852,0.001043413,0.6901698,0.0007020182,0.00007961555,0.000008290646,0.05080142,0.00004125094,0.0003828844,0.008701799,0.2465602,0.0005644967],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7974706,0.00004629618,0.000046783,0.006409825,0.00005369407,0.0004313101,0.00009181617,0.00001454467,0.1954352],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9926315,0.0000649388,0.0006159256,0.00002213411,0.00007267418,5.925974e-7,0.00001285504,0.00001127959,0.006568094],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4270762,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9955621,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1878148134","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1129","title":"Aboriginal Over-representation and R. v. Gladue: Where We Were, Where We Are and Where We Might Be Going","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":21,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Representation (politics); Supreme court; Political science; Law; History; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05892869499764502,"gpt":0.3632767423738641,"spread":0.3043480473762191,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006772309,0.0003252134,0.0006543304,0.00003624856,0.001086615,0.0001874001,0.0003374861,0.0001610935,0.001163983],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007656834,0.0002933806,0.0001529187,0.0003332448,0.0006586982,0.001032369,0.00007147127,0.0003008755,0.00009132276],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001035395,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001844453,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004361642,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05395872,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9971574,0.0003872298,0.0004961136,0.0006384798,0.0007842604,0.000536508],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985294,0.0002616524,0.0002745151,0.0003929717,0.0002042696,0.0003372138],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00009245874,0.0001827373,0.04761425,0.03490407,0.0001362952,0.0004210181,0.01069118,0.000002189288,0.0001633691,0.1050211,0.7755948,0.02517653],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002660181,0.00004827103,0.0009012733,0.01671543,0.0001648548,0.00006466975,0.0007976671,0.000009379855,0.00001143107,0.0006079036,0.9800509,0.0003622544],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.009364684,0.8718424,0.00001741196,0.1064148,0.0003373827,0.0007253907,0.00003121059,0.0001002735,0.01116639],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.03636347,0.9570879,0.0003178909,0.0007296021,0.0003933024,0.00003883996,0.000006115327,0.00002784796,0.005034971],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.204456,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999518,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2945995780","doi":"","title":"The power of persuasion : the politics of the new right in Ontario","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Black Rose Books","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Persuasion; Politics; Power (physics); Political science; Psychology; Social psychology; Law; Physics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0318731851168803,"gpt":0.2901918900405461,"spread":0.2583187049236658,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00112814,0.0001698892,0.0002499701,0.00003710555,0.0004994104,0.00004366256,0.001009851,0.000262774,0.0002006233],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001358394,0.00008275957,0.0002442817,0.00006105616,0.00172973,0.00004753582,0.0001741772,0.0005659018,0.00001859084],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005493356,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003885985,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1728708,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7454755,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981139,0.0001339413,0.0004205536,0.0001843827,0.0007833309,0.0003638403],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982849,0.0006233286,0.0003260687,0.000566395,0.0001206587,0.00007863608],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003844922,0.00002325046,0.0003769422,0.00001908843,0.00001983494,0.000004497645,0.05865864,0.000002503897,0.00001042702,0.812488,0.1279745,0.000383887],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009423805,0.00003534776,0.002141584,0.0002650033,0.00004358805,7.65141e-7,0.002379074,4.453084e-7,0.00007740073,0.05050401,0.9443532,0.0001053399],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.00629058,0.0007233325,0.000003559156,0.002360236,0.0004644221,0.000466627,0.00000609741,0.000008395808,0.9896768],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.08564008,0.00008570453,0.000009634509,0.0001923057,0.0001780614,0.000001438612,9.905594e-7,0.00001358456,0.9138782],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8163788,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8326371,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2991746385","doi":"10.3138/utlj.69.s1.002","title":"The disappointing remedy? Damages as a remedy for violations of human rights","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Toronto Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"The Wilson Centre; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Damages; Political science; Punitive damages; Tort; Law; Human rights; Common law; Proportionality (law); Disappointment; Discretion; Law and economics; Economics; Liability; Psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0180758684164944,"gpt":0.299539059668864,"spread":0.2814631912523696,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007453215,0.00004543458,0.0001089744,0.000009138029,0.002721695,0.00003315045,0.0003664149,0.00003902554,0.0004598042],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005244033,0.00003817033,0.0001183397,0.00002181351,0.0003041745,0.0004936595,0.00003831861,0.00006989056,0.000004286739],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001273931,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005433523,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1416702,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5204927,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9993031,0.00009429297,0.0001244695,0.00007503767,0.0002472455,0.00015588],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991133,0.000246057,0.0002200139,0.0001104275,0.0002391562,0.00007099791],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00008396568,0.00003753545,0.001547441,0.00001582306,0.00004200734,0.000002542995,0.01726939,0.000005872756,0.001795842,0.9761447,0.002103864,0.0009510528],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005989629,0.0002892835,0.003873368,0.000197115,0.00009997742,0.000004167669,0.05112656,0.00003414026,0.0004095921,0.02027789,0.9229485,0.0001404446],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.5695723,0.000353437,0.0002615019,0.0020093,0.0003375621,0.0002778932,0.000005769351,0.00001448049,0.4271678],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9950007,0.00006461071,0.0005103895,0.000007296226,0.00008807913,4.053238e-8,6.173789e-7,0.00000218147,0.004326046],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9558668,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9985766,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1983507877","doi":"10.1353/jls.2006.0040","title":"Protecting Research Confidentiality : Towards a Research-Participant Shield Law","year":2006,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society / Revue Canadienne Droit et Société","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Humanities; Political science; Philosophy","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1654605485845764,"gpt":0.403462653446372,"spread":0.2380021048617956,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts","research_integrity"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.02917037,0.000325755,0.0007941423,0.0001657421,0.005660682,0.0009656197,0.0008785356,0.0006689173,0.0005519598],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001253226,0.0003797799,0.0005951238,0.001012401,0.00826945,0.001019561,0.0001024639,0.00380977,0.00001996894],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003082161,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006635503,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9740098,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.992019,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9916185,0.002723234,0.001129659,0.0005941093,0.0008513631,0.003083138],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9921699,0.001515367,0.0004076609,0.0004000643,0.002311497,0.003195535],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001556558,0.00004009151,0.00007002489,0.0003210361,0.0001115004,0.0004400923,0.1137555,0.00001880751,0.00008450595,0.8742012,0.00885746,0.002084259],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005018885,0.0004164415,0.0003797789,0.001262848,0.0001760962,0.0002884854,0.1682847,0.00007254676,0.0001048251,0.1787081,0.6493394,0.0004649635],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7544663,0.01626877,0.00005040146,0.0841103,0.002880857,0.0008107192,0.0001453568,0.00001719202,0.1412501],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9807894,0.0006915296,0.0002622527,0.001580867,0.002842549,0.00002354859,0.000005059946,0.00004944504,0.01375534],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6954931,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998654,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2345743899","doi":"","title":"A Comparative Look at Plea Bargaining in Australia, Canada, England, New Zealand, and the United States.","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Plea; Political science; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06726659079461812,"gpt":0.3286751651652943,"spread":0.2614085743706762,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004655554,0.00007126218,0.0001385981,0.00002722608,0.0001967003,0.00003565145,0.0001282694,0.00002910553,0.000612402],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009263789,0.00003562228,0.00001287849,0.0001515252,0.0003051723,0.00009556495,0.00004072256,0.00005816622,0.0000199657],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001655754,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00027422,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9939267,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9989525,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990984,0.0001810681,0.0001263497,0.0001307709,0.000206299,0.0002571417],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988779,0.0008413811,0.0000359351,0.00007516638,0.00003238172,0.0001372092],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001009296,0.00002525186,0.2116459,0.000008359417,0.00005269933,0.00006158455,0.2801103,0.00008321406,0.00008391411,0.1079986,0.3953204,0.003600524],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002238046,0.00002650884,0.01393642,0.0000554764,0.00001197454,0.000002219044,0.01424332,0.00005826928,0.00008596527,0.004188538,0.9649957,0.0001575136],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9704143,0.00004737683,0.00001765898,0.02302397,0.00005373234,0.0001541852,0.000006614508,0.00001206768,0.006270083],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8992699,0.00009653797,0.00002043245,0.0004329935,0.00005203979,0.000003412222,0.000002527692,0.000002084666,0.1001201],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5696754,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6705373,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2143034414","doi":"","title":"General Defences in Criminal Law: Domestic and Comparative Perspectives","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University)","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Mens rea; Culpability; Criminal law; Law; Compromise; Doctrine; Punitive damages; Sociology; Political science; Criminology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.149561597980628,"gpt":0.3894280440194031,"spread":0.2398664460387751,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.003181805,0.0005428293,0.001003233,0.00133037,0.00208761,0.0004009413,0.001491868,0.0006935404,0.0003488213],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004023675,0.0006105191,0.0002539225,0.0008453573,0.006065351,0.000659882,0.0005839769,0.002132784,0.0001936519],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001281882,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003135778,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02772236,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.3064538,"domain_scores_codex":[0.992616,0.002276489,0.0004642575,0.001393957,0.001820147,0.001429167],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9952542,0.002134097,0.0002606702,0.0006129324,0.001055625,0.0006824626],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003028381,0.00008211045,0.001217511,0.0001479232,0.00008227167,0.0005833101,0.02506444,0.00001451454,0.000005573687,0.9679943,0.003217954,0.001287202],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008207515,0.0003464326,0.001830635,0.0005607656,0.0001574489,0.00001239204,0.02304164,0.00006218686,0.000002005715,0.02054519,0.9517842,0.0008363333],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.06207401,0.001442887,0.00002204329,0.001268125,0.0002979956,0.00103106,0.00004998353,0.0001135121,0.9337004],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.370766,0.002275716,0.0001954738,0.00004910501,0.001451059,0.000007300832,0.00004274581,0.00003948285,0.6251731],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9485663,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996346,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2594526090","doi":"","title":"Self-governing Codifications of English Criminal Law and Empire: The Queensland and Canadian Examples","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The University of Queensland Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Criminal code; Politics; Project commissioning; Publishing; Political science; Criminal law; Code (set theory); Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03147503646858546,"gpt":0.258304229251282,"spread":0.2268291927826966,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001653609,0.00006478138,0.0001156862,0.00003263849,0.002620045,0.00005404287,0.0002422189,0.00005375267,0.00004285378],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00008963143,0.00004633126,0.00003815175,0.00007983346,0.001231879,0.0001815197,0.0000331742,0.0001996603,8.476058e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004955764,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001473919,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5700043,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9149869,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991818,0.0001714786,0.0001214926,0.00008449466,0.0002254425,0.0002152571],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998866,0.0004524445,0.0001380695,0.000101053,0.0002542486,0.0001882476],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001031469,0.00002425237,0.0234624,0.00003986184,0.00007467483,0.00003204246,0.234909,0.000006872235,0.00001870413,0.7384593,0.001982626,0.0008871686],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003629781,0.00006249464,0.05620947,0.00008320793,0.0002365385,0.00004511302,0.1563646,0.00001133479,0.00003451919,0.001642348,0.7848246,0.0001228545],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8639293,0.001041137,0.0001325354,0.003646583,0.0001098565,0.0001223035,0.00002320233,0.0000125522,0.1309825],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9985697,0.0007468889,0.0002998429,0.0001192998,0.0001166356,2.458838e-8,7.033231e-7,0.000002905533,0.0001440568],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7828419,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9986784,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2241033841","doi":"","title":"Report of the Commission on Systemic Racism in the Ontario Criminal Justice System","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Commission; Racism; Criminal justice; Criminology; Political science; Economic Justice; Law; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04554061431224795,"gpt":0.3190094333473102,"spread":0.2734688190350623,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001720885,0.00006688859,0.0001170086,0.00002194514,0.0003809631,0.00003833519,0.0004176921,0.00005679015,0.00003573162],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001211847,0.00003316017,0.00006219163,0.0001556863,0.0001146577,0.00006860893,0.00002893005,0.0001448049,0.00001352471],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002676828,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001862303,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5011772,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4013754,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985184,0.0003045453,0.0003085947,0.0001312036,0.0005750744,0.0001621632],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991767,0.0002904817,0.000144552,0.0003062427,0.00005947596,0.00002249909],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000801943,0.0001912516,0.02021414,0.0007477093,0.000005102332,0.0003197087,0.06351413,0.0002468569,0.0003744023,0.8938051,0.02000222,0.0004991666],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005855956,0.0001954414,0.2962836,0.004050557,0.0008819484,0.001166016,0.5104388,0.0001318107,0.001111128,0.001437927,0.1831961,0.0005210963],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6143648,0.00003756042,0.00003560059,0.001336584,0.0003439474,0.0002141614,3.808219e-7,0.00001614392,0.3836508],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9860668,0.000001483806,0.00002988344,0.00007172272,0.0001206894,0.000007173793,4.631229e-7,0.000002574873,0.01369928],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8923672,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.609548,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1751803832","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1172","title":"A More Lasting Comfort?: The Politics of Minimum Sentences, the Rule of Law and R. v. Ferguson","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Politics; Law; Punishment (psychology); Supreme court; Economic Justice; Political science; Criminal justice; Psychology; Social psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05607256762659776,"gpt":0.3494054192767731,"spread":0.2933328516501753,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001245094,0.0001006751,0.000301017,0.00000678541,0.0004837608,0.00002851518,0.0003892583,0.00003837105,0.00003760089],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002136056,0.00005587858,0.0001015102,0.0001460351,0.0008100086,0.0001196339,0.00005021314,0.0001100399,0.000002481179],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002472218,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000711093,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008083044,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002757696,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986589,0.0001899754,0.0003528902,0.0001341064,0.0004176115,0.0002465236],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989856,0.0003446085,0.0001895914,0.0002633175,0.0001529018,0.00006397143],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000003836941,0.00003206094,0.0002749265,0.0007577091,0.00001240496,0.00000170714,0.002835894,8.417711e-7,0.00006913738,0.9914203,0.002335072,0.00225617],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008238128,0.00007946714,0.0004631928,0.00421929,0.0001961899,0.000008667132,0.001523649,0.00002141062,0.0001369619,0.007949879,0.985191,0.0001278363],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.09123498,0.4431798,0.00004297362,0.3039806,0.0003852241,0.002084156,0.00005839431,0.00007654237,0.1589573],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9689972,0.02480748,0.0001084322,0.005650735,0.000103372,0.000005425637,0.000001635987,0.000004898815,0.0003208654],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9834704,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9985222,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2161752717","doi":"10.1017/s0008197302001551","title":"Digging the Dirt: Disclosure of Records in Sexual Assault Cases","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":17,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Credibility; Confidentiality; Context (archaeology); Attendance; Anonymity; Criminology; Sexual assault; Political science; Law; Section (typography); Psychology; Sexual violence; Poison control; Medicine; History; Suicide prevention; Business; Medical emergency; Advertising","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06966465143572685,"gpt":0.3151801492568423,"spread":0.2455154978211154,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002201929,0.00009138923,0.0001522061,0.00002515641,0.001203487,0.0001416383,0.0005413918,0.00005175523,0.0001552819],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003170132,0.0000490956,0.00007664083,0.0002292553,0.0005710666,0.0002882512,0.00005180114,0.0004931305,0.00002097555],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007332578,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003943413,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02369014,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05125151,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982473,0.0004758864,0.0002882372,0.000101445,0.0005542701,0.0003329246],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988484,0.0006293887,0.0001666926,0.0001880927,0.00008519252,0.00008220239],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000229128,0.0004837634,0.06129339,0.00007619488,0.0001388135,0.001058419,0.07741639,0.0003494947,0.0007224526,0.5252715,0.2136661,0.1192944],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007346732,0.0003507214,0.03703982,0.0003979142,0.0001602864,0.001302599,0.08874144,0.0004185934,0.0002561364,0.002029329,0.8680511,0.0005173794],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8888802,0.001682617,0.00001965447,0.03824927,0.000549677,0.0001293231,0.000008693135,0.000016191,0.07046439],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9965677,0.0004124846,0.00001434804,0.0003482224,0.0006834335,0.00000266707,2.353619e-7,0.000007545162,0.0019634],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.654385,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9828112,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1497282126","doi":"","title":"When Rights Become Empty Promises: Promoting an Exclusionary Rule that Vindicates Personal Rights","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":17,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Exclusionary rule; Political science; Supreme court; Law; Constitution; Rule of law; Appeal; Search and seizure; Status quo; Convict; Law and economics; Economics; Politics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03988807206243631,"gpt":0.2954435197896745,"spread":0.2555554477272381,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003485705,0.0002314487,0.0002514869,0.0001331072,0.003260808,0.0001618246,0.0008317126,0.0001570908,0.001322009],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005718112,0.0001790054,0.0001707773,0.0001504053,0.0003307088,0.001442729,0.00008525443,0.001409723,0.0001206342],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0008938154,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002138033,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007998903,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03736907,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9954126,0.0004025344,0.0003183752,0.0003931034,0.0008162464,0.002657134],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989477,0.00007678346,0.0002806071,0.0001730214,0.0001291379,0.0003926962],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0005682707,0.001622027,0.03647027,0.00005432849,0.0004079893,0.0002300584,0.4191691,5.972135e-7,0.0009639207,0.517211,0.0008155614,0.02248689],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004088248,0.0005697376,0.005148904,0.0001045642,0.00008487453,0.0003745703,0.01366631,0.00002892685,0.0004852837,0.9654812,0.01321745,0.0004294138],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9856411,0.001224834,0.0001294394,0.001782343,0.0003053231,0.0002804914,0.000002400288,0.0001009564,0.01053317],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9952534,0.0003246676,0.0003844408,0.00005660332,0.0007844008,0.00001142741,0.000004111067,0.00001927935,0.003161639],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4482702,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995909,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3006647981","doi":"10.3138/utlj.2019-0066","title":"Criminal law as public ordering","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Toronto Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":17,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Criminal law; Order (exchange); Law; Relation (database); Meaning (existential); Verb; Noun; Philosophy of law; Leverage (statistics); Phrase; Public law; Sociology; Political science; Linguistics; Epistemology; Computer science; Philosophy; Business; Artificial intelligence","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05364129303452982,"gpt":0.2770848625728848,"spread":0.223443569538355,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002758741,0.00006362388,0.0001261016,0.000006613866,0.001384829,0.00008689365,0.0004465859,0.0000532783,0.004676019],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006712409,0.00007427748,0.0001011554,0.00003385039,0.0003994509,0.001210012,0.00007792534,0.0001369198,0.00004288913],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001979363,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001398785,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2594647,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.3923528,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990977,0.0001018559,0.00009410971,0.0001113028,0.0003620115,0.0002330142],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992401,0.00004150648,0.00009914807,0.00006287788,0.0001709071,0.0003854725],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007623986,0.00002896763,0.0001652723,0.00001570597,0.00002416941,0.0001115467,0.03174753,0.000005591867,0.0001692755,0.9621094,0.002537834,0.003008451],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002158723,0.0001202973,0.000149684,0.00002321693,0.00004367729,0.00001537847,0.06892075,0.00001294887,0.00003470271,0.0005749995,0.9297894,0.00009901763],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.04693382,0.0006088839,0.0006284929,0.01998292,0.0002319842,0.0000617476,0.00000263271,0.00004428032,0.9315053],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9976274,0.0003151929,0.0008813273,0.0005262433,0.0002470766,1.175325e-8,3.56726e-7,0.000003585626,0.0003987914],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9615344,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999152,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2977191326","doi":"10.3138/cjcrim.42.4.511","title":"Due Process and Victims' Rights: The New Law and Politics of Criminal Justice","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":16,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Concordia University","funders":"","keywords":"Politics; Criminal justice; Criminology; Law; Political science; Criminal law; Due process; Economic Justice; Criminal procedure; Theory of criminal justice; Process (computing); Sociology; Public law; Sources of law; Computer science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04523311179069807,"gpt":0.3153036313941911,"spread":0.270070519603493,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003049447,0.00008438855,0.0002011915,0.00008204064,0.0006542266,0.00005479542,0.0002687937,0.00009961491,0.0003984004],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001673701,0.0000627892,0.00003301252,0.00005809011,0.001522337,0.0002104632,0.000006357111,0.0002078627,0.000003376369],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004427471,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001309438,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1580572,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.190722,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990342,0.0001112717,0.0002638546,0.00009666949,0.0001435394,0.0003504097],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988304,0.0001739429,0.0001201542,0.00008935492,0.0001915419,0.000594579],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0000500015,0.00001347189,0.0002336412,0.0001278512,0.00003558588,0.0002718244,0.0782815,0.00001677896,0.00002432108,0.9053568,0.003811024,0.01177725],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005444132,0.0005307288,0.004626155,0.0001666636,0.001230116,0.002106567,0.03044932,0.0000130002,0.0002821668,0.1257021,0.8340813,0.0002674878],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9581698,0.002512624,0.0000158851,0.01268888,0.0002270709,0.00006267434,0.000004712436,0.000003089344,0.02631525],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9974225,0.0001838795,0.0001349238,0.001223027,0.0003855489,3.999757e-7,1.807588e-7,0.000004674314,0.0006449341],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8302702,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8475494,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2337467981","doi":"10.60082/2817-5069.1466","title":"Searching for Smith: The Constitutionality of Mandatory Sentences","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Osgoode Hall law journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":16,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Constitutionality; Supreme court; Law; Jurisprudence; Punishment (psychology); Parliament; Punitive damages; Proportionality (law); Political science; Constitutional review; Constitution; Psychology; Social psychology; Politics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.09996215917625473,"gpt":0.391120778265037,"spread":0.2911586190887823,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00251274,0.00006143374,0.0001106837,0.00001826105,0.0020377,0.000116333,0.0003458778,0.00003857507,0.0001617004],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002617247,0.00004128854,0.0001175811,0.00007575291,0.001041625,0.0002993293,0.00002806929,0.0001859888,0.000006933622],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004865985,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002658767,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0342031,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1072278,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987654,0.0002084736,0.0002182764,0.00009706298,0.0004526466,0.0002581108],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989876,0.0004558048,0.0001349811,0.00009179694,0.0002178449,0.0001120152],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003920637,0.00002854833,0.002969745,0.00001068182,0.00001606066,0.000008150873,0.0009804949,0.00003507044,0.0000574162,0.9928198,0.0006835197,0.002351234],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004155024,0.00008724925,0.002586913,0.0002019351,0.0000631944,0.000216616,0.01053287,0.0000786311,0.0001919288,0.3049963,0.6804613,0.0001675966],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.04169484,0.001606653,0.006849058,0.02358967,0.0009831985,0.0003355794,0.00001964076,0.00002940838,0.9248919],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978179,0.0004147282,0.0007226162,0.0002107081,0.000462495,0.000003848822,5.679998e-7,0.000003099405,0.0003640685],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9561231,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992615,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2037174929","doi":"10.7202/1000625ar","title":"Roncarelli v. Duplessis and Damages for Abuse of Power: For What Did It Stand in 1959 and For What Does It Stand in 2009?","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"McGill Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Damages; Supreme court; Liability; Tort; Economic Justice; Abuse of power; Sociology; Power (physics); Common law; Political science; Politics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07964043449649322,"gpt":0.3457996897785181,"spread":0.2661592552820249,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001664721,0.0001478409,0.0003440396,0.00009609955,0.001009606,0.0003425319,0.0001916561,0.0001176238,0.00003720129],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001508277,0.0001151595,0.00008466123,0.0000935416,0.0003225444,0.002352453,0.00002981115,0.0001245037,2.088657e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001094491,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003525464,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001900528,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1264575,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985762,0.00008093347,0.0004348093,0.0002474309,0.0002318419,0.0004288012],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988133,0.0005064284,0.0001992569,0.0001021895,0.0002073052,0.0001715499],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.008639526,0.001330604,0.01569684,0.002729555,0.0002949481,0.0001019109,0.2698572,0.00003602281,0.001050486,0.5731142,0.005216166,0.1219325],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.003086331,0.0007624037,0.001631249,0.00217033,0.00009427004,0.00001489676,0.2326669,0.00004783933,0.001925521,0.01246721,0.7447294,0.0004036111],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9554178,0.02580685,0.0007053165,0.008573124,0.001150477,0.002054577,0.000490238,0.00001867372,0.005782921],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9633511,0.03450948,0.001674241,0.0001518228,0.00007582939,0.00003870587,0.000001476898,0.00001729026,0.0001800682],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7395133,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8894824,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W644065874","doi":"10.5040/9781474202220","title":"Homicide Law in Comparative Perspective","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"book","venue":"Hart Publishing eBooks","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Homicide; Perspective (graphical); Criminology; Psychology; Law; Political science; Medicine; Computer science; Medical emergency; Poison control; Human factors and ergonomics; Artificial intelligence","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1106810290761844,"gpt":0.3713923294949639,"spread":0.2607113004187795,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002273419,0.0002967135,0.0005335404,0.0002849197,0.0005271676,0.001962811,0.0008519674,0.0005954946,0.0002336489],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003561017,0.0003193989,0.0001679473,0.00008830053,0.001037084,0.001397539,0.0001559695,0.001327935,0.0001690786],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001952626,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001398685,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.04366384,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2205516,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9972585,0.0002077803,0.0003984298,0.0005861413,0.0008757537,0.000673419],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981246,0.0006377136,0.0002441806,0.0003081003,0.0004484111,0.000236983],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002215657,0.00001138616,0.00001214841,0.0000109213,0.00001174565,0.00005448607,0.0396608,7.672231e-7,0.000003197952,0.7916366,0.1682563,0.0003195598],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001464395,0.00002315429,0.00004901718,0.0003454506,0.00002284935,0.000002182857,0.01099148,0.000001354718,0.00002427015,0.08354014,0.904507,0.0003466757],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001535414,0.0003557758,0.00001397239,0.001754732,0.0006200817,0.0004444881,0.00002268307,0.0001429302,0.9964918],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0767175,0.00001078211,0.00016637,0.001383311,0.00133715,0.00002033076,0.00002636401,0.00003422634,0.9203039],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7362508,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999258,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4231199517","doi":"10.3138/utlj.58.2.153","title":"LEGITIMATING PUBLIC POLICY","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Toronto Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Legitimacy; Legislature; Political science; Public administration; Law and economics; Public policy; Democracy; Deliberative democracy; Policy making; Democratic legitimacy; Policy analysis; Position (finance); Law; Sociology; Economics; Politics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04989982207217115,"gpt":0.2841927202892959,"spread":0.2342928982171248,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000312809,0.00004247977,0.00009181938,0.00001765332,0.002310382,0.00002869565,0.000302086,0.000040431,0.001490626],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009068976,0.00004884398,0.00008230183,0.00003830995,0.0004787364,0.001161514,0.00003990947,0.00008328535,0.00001388804],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003837825,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003264041,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4294876,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2945066,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992701,0.00009250709,0.00007667613,0.00006324804,0.0002893597,0.0002080746],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.999441,0.0000458688,0.0001048077,0.00006378524,0.0001609971,0.0001835911],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002886276,0.00006689439,0.002592561,0.000008084104,0.00002885352,0.0001532988,0.04348359,0.000007461151,0.00008877822,0.9337094,0.01043628,0.00939587],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002552002,0.00005155311,0.002890495,0.00003126868,0.00001266262,0.0001021217,0.03047503,0.0000124803,0.00001140168,0.0008782175,0.9651743,0.0001052755],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.06311332,0.0003993111,0.000517058,0.006348528,0.0001397273,0.00004224725,0.000002021505,0.00002649536,0.9294113],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9951168,0.0007090142,0.00165035,0.00006529524,0.0002860023,8.049367e-9,2.278331e-7,0.000002176751,0.002170139],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.954738,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994221,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2217361879","doi":"","title":"Rights-vetting in New Zealand and Canada: Similar Idea, Different Outcomes","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"New Zealand journal of public and international law","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Vetting; Charter; Legislation; Project commissioning; Law; Political science; Politics; Bureaucracy; Publishing; Obligation; Bill of rights; Public administration; Human rights; Law and economics; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03275547374255387,"gpt":0.3047101050061511,"spread":0.2719546312635972,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005148686,0.0001030131,0.0002124416,0.00008890784,0.0001464541,0.0002165106,0.0002062936,0.00005250505,0.0002146308],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000163326,0.00007231107,0.0000423095,0.00004509696,0.00008055726,0.0006251403,0.00003894725,0.0001889292,9.301938e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001686079,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000565796,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6234475,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9493472,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987664,0.00006509433,0.0003546505,0.0001150545,0.0004742416,0.0002245623],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990803,0.0002084599,0.0001802091,0.00004123741,0.0001093183,0.0003804666],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00005073483,0.00007283463,0.5984774,0.000004339809,0.00008386264,0.00003850922,0.002546124,0.00001039898,0.00002066736,0.2297558,0.1438401,0.02509925],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007040197,0.00003933717,0.1118828,0.00004062374,0.00001128191,0.00002937088,0.0002242964,0.00002376618,0.000007746998,0.006580982,0.880367,0.00008868084],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7364498,0.000433166,0.00002633687,0.252978,0.0004599582,0.00005293206,0.000004656082,0.00000568604,0.009589422],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9687377,0.0003319312,0.0001855743,0.001132955,0.0008720566,2.88784e-7,0.000001612045,0.000004276933,0.02873363],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.736527,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.37906,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2782384083","doi":"","title":"Criminal Code of Canada","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Encyclopedia of Canadian Laws","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Code (set theory); Criminal code; Political science; Criminology; Law; Criminal law; Computer science; Sociology; Set (abstract data type); Programming language","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03377678052959541,"gpt":0.2963913922807696,"spread":0.2626146117511742,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003443901,0.00007218858,0.0001691274,0.00009727849,0.000693591,0.00002689632,0.0006606004,0.00005667908,0.0004587284],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007775046,0.00007790984,0.00004151825,0.00008722618,0.0004269366,0.0001790677,0.00002371114,0.00007262518,0.000004424313],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001566527,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007010693,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9997466,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9999908,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989092,0.00003936249,0.0001940034,0.0001266243,0.0003612679,0.0003695387],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987845,0.00007532119,0.0001699714,0.0003572752,0.0001393302,0.0004735736],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003161868,0.00002917825,0.05779291,0.0001506399,0.00003563564,0.0001750946,0.01520889,0.00001280053,0.00006301765,0.4602158,0.4457628,0.02052171],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005506847,0.00001470467,0.03869976,0.00003173224,0.00001932492,6.519423e-7,0.001448053,0.000001444141,0.00009903104,0.0004911594,0.9590473,0.00009181235],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1629451,0.00009828209,0.000001617588,0.006964017,0.0005563495,0.00008315963,0.00008671175,0.000003949005,0.8292608],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9886427,0.0002975244,0.000172384,0.0001277863,0.0001877818,0.000002806855,0.000001449059,0.000006130543,0.01056145],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8256975,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9986187,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2234091314","doi":"","title":"Textual Regulation of Child Welfare: A Critique of the Ontario Risk Assessment Model","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Review of Social Policy / Revue canadienne de politique sociale","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Welfare; Risk assessment; Economics; Public economics; Actuarial science; Political science; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02088124975943659,"gpt":0.3100175373163193,"spread":0.2891362875568826,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002272543,0.0002013889,0.000650824,0.0001686629,0.001106606,0.00001745814,0.0005371054,0.0002710268,0.0003022811],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00289429,0.0002133652,0.000448841,0.0007322722,0.0009142569,0.0001583826,0.0000271954,0.0003959052,8.175348e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005326104,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01638807,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9897364,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9986518,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9969139,0.0008765882,0.0007384086,0.0002521754,0.0002454114,0.0009735613],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9975199,0.00008580604,0.0007080459,0.0003352144,0.0007072014,0.0006438909],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000001627176,0.00001928499,0.001446193,0.0011456,0.00002924694,0.000001097431,0.01510803,0.00001021722,0.00001018087,0.9793319,0.002008703,0.0008879311],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004184139,0.00007973719,0.1223492,0.005344305,0.0004755445,0.00001596878,0.0142045,0.00002363182,0.0001906839,0.08554036,0.7706368,0.0007209112],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2091848,0.003115477,0.00006077249,0.2422632,0.000304146,0.002156338,0.001676594,0.00002850346,0.5412103],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9934424,0.002198933,0.0001847653,0.002403584,0.0003466302,0.00004087465,0.00001212138,0.00002462396,0.001346043],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8937915,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9984923,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}