{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":283,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":1,"predictions_cover":283,"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":"59494f77e226","filters":{"topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes"}},"results":[{"id":"W1996358874","doi":"10.1007/s10979-005-8122-9","title":"Racial Bias in Mock Juror Decision-Making: A Meta-Analytic Review of Defendant Treatment.","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"review","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":321,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Regina","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Jury; Racial bias; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Empirical research; Meta-analysis; In-group favoritism; White (mutation); Racism; Criminology; Social group; Law; Political science; Epistemology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.3653564970084659,"gpt":0.5213447118406104,"spread":0.1559882148321445,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001413953,0.000542417,0.003956644,0.0003336937,0.0004112957,0.0001315055,0.0006163529,0.0003328371,0.00216139],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003877866,0.0003777377,0.001366815,0.0006498272,0.0004031844,0.0001844218,0.0001157388,0.0002773797,0.00005801341],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002418375,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005070719,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000301033,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009698278,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9959079,0.0005471365,0.001610488,0.0007152277,0.0007967464,0.0004224939],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971948,0.0009680436,0.0009455701,0.0005913366,0.0001536168,0.0001466724],"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":[0.000002716811,0.0002657646,0.000005818912,0.004502499,0.0002132822,0.00005943189,0.0002989859,3.793338e-8,2.138075e-8,0.02533438,0.0001783639,0.9691387],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001277293,0.00008912122,0.00001726676,0.02314544,0.02093937,0.000009980927,0.00002127938,1.536635e-8,7.989956e-8,0.0007995251,0.9545198,0.0003303826],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.00008488536,0.9890373,0.000001167345,0.00002372014,0.0001113613,0.001414045,0.0000871425,0.00003610096,0.009204321],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.001004137,0.9961692,0.0003514139,0.000130266,0.0001624873,0.0003600608,0.00002002442,0.00004907367,0.001753299],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9688083,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998674,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2155797509","doi":"10.1080/0269993024400002","title":"Why wasn't O.J. convicted? Emotional coherence in legal inference","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cognition & Emotion","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":150,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy); Psychology; Wishful thinking; Verdict; Bayesian probability; Bayesian inference; Inference; Social psychology; Cognitive psychology; Epistemology; Law; Artificial intelligence; Computer science; Statistics; Mathematics; Philosophy; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05046037245431292,"gpt":0.3458812731433102,"spread":0.2954209006889973,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008361901,0.0001342738,0.000150926,0.0002318022,0.0003500554,0.0001828177,0.0001801524,0.0001579984,0.003333478],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003011789,0.000151324,0.00004711956,0.0009018147,0.0002252156,0.0009960278,0.00001999467,0.0002216296,0.0004230739],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001228414,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003459047,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001588395,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0009904621,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979256,0.0004437587,0.0003242857,0.000342971,0.0006345788,0.0003287589],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987693,0.0003345268,0.0001363767,0.0001302803,0.0005176893,0.0001118034],"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":[0.0001222486,0.001283419,0.02662966,0.000139873,0.00003922602,0.00008455972,0.009560962,0.000390089,0.002885396,0.8310686,0.02161766,0.1061783],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.003281527,0.0002271592,0.1650028,0.001055606,0.0000613493,0.0000337437,0.007677424,0.0002887882,0.003575049,0.2282541,0.5892147,0.00132773],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6151382,0.0001909679,0.03809285,0.003581435,0.001672277,0.0008559882,0.00003531444,0.0004119909,0.3400209],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9971231,0.00009127371,0.0006980237,0.001081933,0.0001015114,0.00002645828,0.00003713094,0.00001117395,0.0008293888],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6028144,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975776,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2149727989","doi":"10.1177/0093854809344173","title":"The Effects of Victim Gender, Defendant Gender, and Defendant Age on Juror Decision Making","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Criminal Justice and Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":93,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Credibility; Social psychology; Human factors and ergonomics; Sentence; Suicide prevention; Injury prevention; Poison control; Law; Medical emergency; Medicine; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06150790034977005,"gpt":0.3810259112391698,"spread":0.3195180108893998,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005986163,0.0001951921,0.0002301497,0.0001076394,0.001189568,0.000206423,0.0002924115,0.0001204661,0.00001116548],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001206566,0.00013937,0.00006599636,0.0002029324,0.0003504191,0.0001534298,0.00007689023,0.0002103073,0.000007810292],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003633987,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000882308,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00001392163,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00004435178,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981486,0.0001312556,0.0003093038,0.0003750495,0.0006363241,0.0003995012],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973944,0.001932816,0.0001587282,0.0002390462,0.0001312594,0.0001437449],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002262596,0.0002815706,0.000240823,0.000466419,0.000009092917,0.0003057913,0.01653286,0.000001623873,0.002074055,0.01111028,0.0003812677,0.96837],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002267479,0.002621874,0.8310151,0.001389634,0.01724512,0.0002044463,0.1156896,0.00003651525,0.003979249,0.01459673,0.00960731,0.001346932],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9933504,0.003397085,0.0005996923,0.00004616116,0.0005615654,0.0003247713,0.000004564,0.00004613962,0.001669593],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961866,0.001551243,0.001737461,0.0003037503,0.0001262002,0.00001419202,7.782687e-7,0.00001349553,0.0000662573],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.967023,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9149315,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2010509409","doi":"10.1007/s10979-010-9232-6","title":"After 30 years, what do we know about what jurors know? A meta-analytic review of lay knowledge regarding eyewitness factors.","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"review","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":92,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Jurisdiction; Sample (material); Eyewitness testimony; Function (biology); Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1318525415664124,"gpt":0.4401069547092262,"spread":0.3082544131428138,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","scholarly_communication","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002017267,0.000767681,0.004269877,0.0002946288,0.0005473574,0.00154668,0.001116543,0.0007407208,0.00413525],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001601345,0.0005666926,0.001737747,0.000610165,0.0009363575,0.00157829,0.000338352,0.0009103918,0.0001598047],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000107546,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004297356,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00009304425,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001320875,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9952751,0.0007020367,0.001474784,0.001026513,0.0009126481,0.0006089173],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9965762,0.0004973249,0.001087063,0.001065297,0.000450257,0.0003238367],"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":[0.000001163555,0.0001355939,0.000008592383,0.0232568,0.0003053995,0.00002806968,0.001218072,3.444974e-9,2.174987e-7,0.01624703,0.0003332596,0.9584658],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007070928,0.00002695303,0.00001872165,0.1162345,0.01948153,0.00000475876,0.0002441298,3.806788e-9,8.711839e-7,0.0001760072,0.8632063,0.0005356097],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001662913,0.9954332,6.767162e-7,0.00003854432,0.000999547,0.00133458,0.00005325925,0.00007505481,0.001898912],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.0003711417,0.9917935,0.00004673433,0.00007975033,0.0002891597,0.0004281591,0.00003331414,0.0001078029,0.006850441],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9579302,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996784,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2051342016","doi":"10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01903.x","title":"Replications and Limitations of a Two‐Factor Model of Child Witness Credibility","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":85,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Honesty; Credibility; Psychology; Verdict; Social psychology; Recreation; Cognition; Perception; Developmental psychology; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1657162332397874,"gpt":0.4375798531237976,"spread":0.2718636198840102,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001114737,0.00007618684,0.0003258993,0.0001365757,0.0002582099,0.00001114377,0.0002364452,0.0001343879,0.00002729534],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001033214,0.00007380859,0.00008557823,0.0003804301,0.0007437118,0.00009702301,0.00001502851,0.0002119304,0.000001045902],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002715835,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002715602,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000005112209,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00006030417,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986233,0.0001269879,0.000613739,0.000157835,0.0003301336,0.0001479805],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9979433,0.0004699055,0.0008465571,0.0001538837,0.0005115661,0.00007481393],"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":[0.0002053618,0.0005300165,0.0006346994,0.00002255543,0.00008306654,6.027072e-7,0.02823707,0.0002826344,0.004499105,0.9370295,0.001278983,0.02719638],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001967946,0.0001364281,0.02694411,0.00002437746,0.0001068518,0.00001010754,0.005896599,0.0000293503,0.0008014497,0.9536487,0.01022833,0.0002056987],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.834955,0.00014744,0.0160843,0.004248988,0.0002291889,0.000223321,0.00001752101,0.00001288055,0.1440813],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9935991,0.0001821301,0.005808428,0.0002719151,0.0000964928,0.000003901618,3.234573e-7,0.000007880074,0.00002979356],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1586441,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3009827,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1861935076","doi":"10.1002/tht3.163","title":"Sensitivity, Causality, and Statistical Evidence in Courts of Law","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Thought A Journal of Philosophy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":70,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"Université de Montréal; University of Glasgow; European Commission","keywords":"Causation; Impossibility; Sensitivity (control systems); Causality (physics); Rest (music); Counterexample; Statistical evidence; Epistemology; Modal; Econometrics; Positive economics; Economics; Mathematical economics; Law; Philosophy; Political science; Mathematics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.2065072938505597,"gpt":0.4250768947946362,"spread":0.2185696009440765,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004712527,0.00008338637,0.0003244496,0.0001296268,0.0000594568,0.00004674367,0.0001685814,0.00006686665,0.00001611929],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003016388,0.00007214519,0.00003353251,0.0002262886,0.0005542835,0.0005221962,0.00008090219,0.000209108,0.000004366853],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006477896,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003932488,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003079898,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005528499,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9977532,0.0006092034,0.0004610638,0.0001127214,0.0008960533,0.0001677558],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974045,0.001390769,0.0003417589,0.00009894972,0.000550212,0.0002137693],"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":[0.0002624117,0.0001486038,0.006205111,0.00005770832,0.00001891969,0.0004421243,0.007359372,0.00004051568,0.0001812942,0.9809043,0.0009304633,0.00344916],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005555422,0.00025703,0.005331485,0.0005964676,0.00003505157,0.000106494,0.0004527927,0.00002309179,0.0002149387,0.987391,0.004899064,0.0001370724],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9014356,0.006666383,0.006794717,0.02739187,0.001083937,0.0003463938,0.00003569358,0.00003246338,0.05621292],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9955629,0.0001475875,0.003708013,0.0001830653,0.0003659894,3.114731e-7,1.209804e-7,0.000006910255,0.00002511486],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.09412727,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3611116,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2054647540","doi":"10.1023/a:1010659703309","title":"Evaluating the comprehensibility of jury instructions: A method and an example.","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","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":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury instructions; Jury; Legal psychology; Psychology; Deliberation; Comprehension; Set (abstract data type); Hearsay; Computer science; Social psychology; Law; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.3358301573386193,"gpt":0.5286683274996828,"spread":0.1928381701610635,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001253509,0.00006337615,0.0001234088,0.00002379838,0.001031096,0.00009072434,0.0001268116,0.00004827477,0.0001233382],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004182688,0.00004770997,0.00001996768,0.0001081594,0.0005789255,0.0001929383,0.00005158851,0.00008564992,6.171705e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001055884,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003229623,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00466756,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009253642,"domain_scores_codex":[0.998937,0.0003009335,0.0001838764,0.0002094918,0.0002476698,0.0001209934],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993263,0.0002109238,0.00008163085,0.0002073675,0.0001182225,0.00005550979],"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":[0.00002083813,0.0001495798,0.02336553,0.00001619152,0.000006135273,0.000002113228,0.01250908,0.00000267755,0.002848079,0.6288326,0.00001503,0.3322321],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006568842,0.000467544,0.8508736,0.00004344971,0.000221791,0.00002821455,0.009276513,0.00002346775,0.0001933087,0.1121874,0.02574169,0.0002860943],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9961604,0.000105917,0.00008427748,0.00004922708,0.00006641269,0.0002053018,0.000002464478,0.00003093558,0.003295006],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9949918,0.00001520187,0.004601961,0.00008680184,0.00006676613,0.00001781778,0.000001033221,0.000005135224,0.0002135327],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8275081,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7930463,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2019577695","doi":"10.2224/sbp.2003.31.3.301","title":"MOCK JUROR RATINGS OF GUILT IN CANADA: MODERN RACISM AND ETHNIC HERITAGE","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Social Behavior and Personality An International Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":54,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Regina","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Jury; Social psychology; Ethnic group; Criminology; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.09372123689097184,"gpt":0.4054508314848601,"spread":0.3117295945938883,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001028742,0.00009337914,0.0001713606,0.00007381047,0.0003511438,0.0001241021,0.0003233041,0.00008393041,0.0002763267],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004646762,0.00009825174,0.00004430536,0.0001141291,0.0002071723,0.0004427365,0.00004038056,0.0002971065,3.318915e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002844824,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001335076,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.208536,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6911775,"domain_scores_codex":[0.998236,0.0002954662,0.0003170315,0.0001675112,0.0007929422,0.0001910421],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992032,0.0001087837,0.0001825324,0.00005458187,0.0003207415,0.0001301735],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001295695,0.0003007,0.7025442,0.0000207871,0.00005660001,0.000187565,0.1003929,0.000006214274,0.0009081189,0.03307173,0.0003933932,0.1619882],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005693812,0.00003001898,0.9670457,0.0000260759,0.00002194376,0.00005011673,0.01600781,0.00001293204,0.00003974513,0.01479553,0.001237379,0.0001633419],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9963095,0.0002230567,0.00002449044,0.0009896738,0.0003464275,0.00006983651,0.00004059054,0.00000544817,0.001990998],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989874,0.0001592104,0.0003046369,0.0001636146,0.0001640504,0.00000434819,0.000002244991,0.000007174098,0.000207344],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4826415,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7967345,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1811161961","doi":"10.29173/cjs608","title":"The Concept of Truth Regime","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Canadian Journal of Sociology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":53,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Sociology; Epistemology; Philosophy","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06536626347085536,"gpt":0.3321888740369131,"spread":0.2668226105660577,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.001591494,0.00004925004,0.0001567417,0.00005268319,0.001626923,0.000016183,0.0007572869,0.00009651467,0.0001338637],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002253266,0.00002699173,0.00008309604,0.0001287379,0.005178061,0.00005733964,0.0000093442,0.0002665799,0.00001185844],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000110258,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004140498,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00580962,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05318792,"domain_scores_codex":[0.998778,0.0004386856,0.0002703478,0.00004949353,0.0001993716,0.0002640552],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9974009,0.001569163,0.0003628447,0.0001232339,0.0003656401,0.0001781868],"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":[0.00003670124,0.000007997357,0.004661548,0.000001879054,0.0001020866,0.0001080647,0.1955681,0.00006474333,0.00001239412,0.7047908,0.08285608,0.01178965],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003589158,0.0001757776,0.02268078,0.00002303877,0.00003055909,0.0002170774,0.02678344,0.000001201781,0.00008318894,0.2011978,0.7483322,0.000116003],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9109128,0.008191086,0.00006623873,0.05204013,0.002062009,0.0001132163,0.000007383728,0.000006819205,0.02660033],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978803,0.0001865569,0.00005162071,0.0004307763,0.0003373191,4.516359e-7,9.578645e-8,0.000004541703,0.00110835],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6654761,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996728,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2085593820","doi":"10.2307/3505142","title":"10.2307/3505142","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Time to knit","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":51,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Philosophy of law; Divergence (linguistics); Political philosophy; Pragmatic theory of truth; Epistemology; Law; Political science; Philosophy; Sociology; Politics; Comparative law; Linguistics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01575453196466163,"gpt":0.2741954704201217,"spread":0.2584409384554601,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003640934,0.00007522019,0.0001042342,0.00005897394,0.000270795,0.0001048737,0.0003717315,0.00005878193,0.9967618],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002960054,0.00007458452,0.00003620902,0.0004508116,0.00007464453,0.0001447892,0.00002772354,0.00005810917,0.9915522],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003774194,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001016719,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007963782,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000003580923,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989564,0.00006679008,0.0001243212,0.0001912399,0.0003885464,0.0002726754],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994283,0.0001370024,0.00002181877,0.0001843687,0.00007367202,0.0001547768],"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":[0.0000156091,0.00001584006,2.156145e-7,9.169586e-7,0.000002329162,0.000002627197,0.0001825636,0.00001734589,0.00000286822,0.00003228666,0.2074048,0.7923226],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005804919,0.00003110847,0.00004594624,0.000009635243,0.00000447729,6.652444e-7,0.00001060116,0.00000439631,0.00000979886,0.0001595764,0.9995586,0.0001071308],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.001233885,0.0000526738,0.000001345002,0.001112331,0.000005419722,0.0001127579,0.00000365243,0.0001894911,0.9972885],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.00194864,0.000001081553,0.0002539393,0.0001634364,0.0001952063,0.00000786074,0.000001238808,0.00001174858,0.9974169],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7922155,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3041468,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2088262227","doi":"10.1007/s10979-008-9153-9","title":"The impact of prejudice screening procedures on racial bias in the courtroom.","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":50,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Psychology; Prejudice (legal term); Racial bias; Adjudication; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Race (biology); Criminology; Presentation (obstetrics); White (mutation); Racism; Law; Political science; Medicine","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1335946366866975,"gpt":0.4274311957215495,"spread":0.293836559034852,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006679218,0.00007868635,0.0001091966,0.00003246494,0.001544441,0.00009216416,0.0003081313,0.00005140477,0.00003186092],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001538673,0.00004241103,0.00005477318,0.000147182,0.0006153512,0.0001047498,0.00002483875,0.0001394672,0.000002553743],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001707466,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000977715,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002929092,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01357842,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989723,0.0001353491,0.0001695781,0.0001284063,0.0003982374,0.0001961521],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993302,0.00033624,0.00009657587,0.0001406296,0.00006203239,0.00003435727],"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":[0.0002644347,0.0008894447,0.3180504,0.00002137856,0.00002676809,0.00008273143,0.1163813,0.00004251074,0.0004365293,0.5420761,0.005688642,0.01603973],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003256472,0.0002516339,0.9863015,0.00004958182,0.00002128002,0.000006637761,0.002166358,8.396889e-7,0.0000716625,0.002309668,0.00837966,0.0001154725],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9849986,0.000135149,0.000001447531,0.0001459568,0.00002801503,0.0002491682,0.000003982324,0.00001661244,0.01442102],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9993629,0.0000378689,0.0000211873,0.00009451246,0.00009730146,0.0000278981,7.761643e-7,0.000006130943,0.0003513579],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6682512,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997554,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2156286101","doi":"10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01621.x","title":"The CSI Effect and the Canadian and the Australian Jury*<sup>,†</sup>","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Forensic Sciences","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":39,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Mount Royal University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Criminology; Political science; Law; Psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02028269856380566,"gpt":0.3289497797943741,"spread":0.3086670812305685,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.01634343,0.0001029083,0.0002073039,0.0001002383,0.004861216,0.001417443,0.0009868518,0.00007042009,0.00002491421],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00500119,0.00003605284,0.00008314703,0.000528388,0.01346796,0.0003539435,0.00005490488,0.0004665794,0.000003973202],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002595673,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008625445,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01828251,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.3368632,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9978093,0.0004401155,0.000293478,0.0001391118,0.0009418766,0.0003761093],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9949712,0.004131662,0.0002910476,0.0001499752,0.0002325953,0.0002234781],"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":[0.0003526741,0.000009832938,0.01205168,0.000009693118,0.00007210544,0.00002530604,0.03524975,0.0000792123,0.00001881753,0.4667534,0.03303367,0.4523439],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.003710438,0.0003775003,0.03528049,0.0001114495,0.0001769852,0.0005226529,0.02411737,0.0006077748,0.000149125,0.2555831,0.6790336,0.0003295793],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.877785,0.0007978479,0.000002730304,0.1097997,0.0009859283,0.0002305449,0.000001171153,0.00000605084,0.01039093],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9979101,0.0002301263,0.0002331427,0.0005105102,0.0004141601,0.000002457379,2.168622e-8,0.000003440982,0.0006960218],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6459999,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996192,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2442723594","doi":"10.29173/alr1270","title":"Judicial Assessment of the Credibility of Child Witnesses","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Alberta Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":38,"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":"Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development","keywords":"Credibility; Honesty; Psychology; Context (archaeology); Economic Justice; Jurisprudence; Perception; Law; Legal psychology; Social psychology; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02985742953325707,"gpt":0.3916696831742126,"spread":0.3618122536409555,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001275222,0.00009608619,0.0003939703,0.00001307401,0.0002320103,0.00001239646,0.0006483066,0.00005149083,0.0007170439],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001584515,0.00006249343,0.000165264,0.0005140826,0.0005633846,0.000163378,0.0001056858,0.0001099283,0.00001388801],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003727465,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002803559,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003902522,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02725582,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981751,0.0003120673,0.0005266503,0.0001962775,0.0006219281,0.0001679948],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982009,0.000644545,0.0003847726,0.0004932191,0.0002292007,0.00004735155],"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":[0.000003636585,0.000216746,0.004328268,0.001362447,0.00003024243,1.449729e-7,0.0004476612,0.000009730992,0.000008654345,0.9448417,0.005260751,0.04349002],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007783971,0.00001559603,0.008030115,0.002700962,0.00008240675,8.485106e-7,0.00002438756,0.000002592536,0.0001422427,0.001819914,0.9870173,0.00008584439],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0220478,0.05398718,0.00004816099,0.04903066,0.0005142459,0.001311208,0.00001096919,0.00002770854,0.8730221],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9849242,0.01179079,0.0003081594,0.002475149,0.0001324771,0.00001304895,8.370827e-7,0.000007280456,0.0003480855],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9817565,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9904943,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2093433824","doi":"10.1007/s10979-006-9068-2","title":"The impact of negative forensic evidence on mock jurors' perceptions of a trial of drug-facilitated sexual assault.","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law and Human Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":30,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Psychology; Sexual assault; Forensic science; Plaintiff; Legal psychology; Forensic psychology; Verdict; Clinical psychology; Social psychology; Poison control; Injury prevention; Medicine; Law; Medical emergency","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07711302596334052,"gpt":0.438531856417094,"spread":0.3614188304537534,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001270977,0.00009361874,0.0002214042,0.00005798931,0.0004577669,0.00002640643,0.0002160928,0.00007387616,0.00008691241],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004056174,0.00006339816,0.00009734229,0.0002075992,0.001165932,0.0001404964,0.00003229193,0.0001227195,0.000002118451],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003984163,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001111745,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006658282,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01343968,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986176,0.000141663,0.0003868285,0.0001569188,0.0005098208,0.0001871738],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980354,0.00108628,0.0002411238,0.0002004246,0.0003719836,0.00006482639],"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":[0.02428302,0.004420693,0.08473147,0.0001732614,0.0002436117,0.00002097341,0.262778,0.00005132911,0.05846826,0.4663528,0.003633351,0.09484326],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.007990277,0.004681766,0.9381972,0.0002671102,0.0002455555,0.000001300164,0.03304772,0.000001698392,0.004548612,0.01030877,0.0003744902,0.0003354986],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9967629,0.00003284164,0.000006254064,0.00003065755,0.00007100932,0.0004051185,0.00003619373,0.00001384291,0.002641206],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989645,0.00001061741,0.00005353734,0.000005903089,0.00004189356,0.0000103611,0.000001420281,0.000005766973,0.0009059318],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8534657,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999565,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2121676623","doi":"10.1348/135532507x206867","title":"The effect of a judicial declaration of competence on the perceived credibility of children and defendants","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Simon Fraser University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Declaration; Credibility; Witness; Competence (human resources); Psychology; Plaintiff; Social psychology; Perception; Law; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0768228039220244,"gpt":0.3916183657462203,"spread":0.3147955618241959,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001631379,0.00007043246,0.0001968227,0.00002788192,0.0002275487,0.000009683942,0.0002294897,0.0001236483,0.00001983504],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001370961,0.00003338387,0.00003756238,0.0001111391,0.002172559,0.00003298889,0.00004230931,0.0001511287,8.743481e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000004309301,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00001485611,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000212104,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002335482,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987973,0.0003901721,0.0002607516,0.0001888134,0.0002002202,0.000162728],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977965,0.001806169,0.0001523827,0.0001444429,0.00006865785,0.00003187416],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.004775696,0.000360378,0.2318845,0.00004232454,0.00007838328,0.000007655532,0.005613442,0.000003092889,0.01879252,0.191493,0.0004329241,0.5465161],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002472964,0.001005377,0.9894263,0.00001081668,0.00001558825,0.000005126559,0.0002634049,0.000001815656,0.0009737462,0.007826684,0.0001876906,0.00003616932],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9942004,0.0002557872,0.0001126614,0.0009733209,0.00008752261,0.0001861935,0.000003617935,0.000008151374,0.004172347],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9996093,0.0001226931,0.00005990679,0.0001627023,0.00003210283,0.000001987029,3.884215e-7,0.00000163111,0.000009291287],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7575418,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8004886,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2277017378","doi":"","title":"Admissibility Compared: The Reception of Incriminating Expert Evidence (I.E., Forensic Science) in Four Adversarial Jurisdictions","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Digital Commons - DU (University of Denver)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":25,"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":"Adversarial system; Federal Rules of Evidence; Digital evidence; Forensic science; Law; Political science; Psychology; Computer security; Computer science; Digital forensics; Medicine","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06183119103312358,"gpt":0.3077140182746072,"spread":0.2458828272414836,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001632279,0.00009354128,0.000216491,0.0002440648,0.00087872,0.000086552,0.001036581,0.00006581062,0.00007403964],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00325679,0.00009428846,0.00009523216,0.001192289,0.002139341,0.001810165,0.0003462984,0.0001480646,0.00001117568],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000189718,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003349591,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002794951,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008667281,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983303,0.00020931,0.0002196741,0.0002700174,0.0007353517,0.0002353687],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977186,0.001167273,0.0002542426,0.0003471317,0.0004069738,0.0001057672],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006536034,0.000778048,0.3627328,0.0001211475,0.00004728164,0.00001497611,0.2352312,0.0006427573,0.0008427685,0.03272846,0.004039251,0.3621677],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001734115,0.0004339981,0.8109978,0.0009195526,0.00008549654,0.000008610071,0.1271106,0.007142114,0.0004581698,0.02015922,0.03026033,0.0006900294],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.977361,0.00003160064,0.002023065,0.001255008,0.0002097925,0.0001858511,0.00001093686,0.00003960238,0.01888309],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991596,0.00002479568,0.0006652655,0.00001961011,0.0000379446,3.219231e-7,0.000001726913,0.000004139226,0.00008663446],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.448265,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7882491,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2050115964","doi":"10.1163/157181809x458544","title":"The Competency of Children to Testify: Psychological Research Informing Canadian Law Reform","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The International Journal of Children s Rights","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","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":"Queen's University; McGill University; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Oath; Competence (human resources); Law; Psychology; Cross-examination; Meaning (existential); Political science; Sociology; Social psychology; Psychotherapist","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04585516864985725,"gpt":0.42416054779884,"spread":0.3783053791489828,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005147147,0.00009567586,0.0001504652,0.0002768116,0.001226815,0.0002876084,0.003024325,0.0000933585,0.000158401],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001169991,0.00004568676,0.0001004249,0.0003739285,0.0008001769,0.000292984,0.0001319086,0.0008718292,0.0000580313],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001862257,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006492247,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.09742618,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5173539,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9968152,0.0001743452,0.0005462746,0.0001227907,0.001988659,0.0003527114],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9964522,0.0008807811,0.000316452,0.0002632735,0.001819196,0.000268082],"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":[0.0001319351,0.00008338182,0.005981887,4.978317e-7,0.0001461725,0.00001798458,0.00386601,0.00002071477,0.0002147448,0.9581949,0.004606603,0.02673522],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008236979,0.0003554066,0.4309575,0.0001846146,0.00003119809,0.0008791141,0.0006238031,0.000007010487,0.00180765,0.2942042,0.2698103,0.0003156085],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9115081,0.00006365943,0.00001397535,0.01798506,0.001122343,0.0001988909,0.00001543346,0.000008977911,0.06908359],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9974887,0.00003487405,0.0006439468,0.0004779399,0.00106912,0.000002044685,0.000001628863,0.000006869463,0.000274846],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6639907,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9435793,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2794420646","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.2017.0035.r1","title":"The Role of Defendant Race and Racially Charged Media in Canadian Mock Juror Decision Making","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Salience (neuroscience); Race (biology); Psychology; Verdict; Jury; Social psychology; Racial profiling; Criminology; Law; Sociology; Political science; Gender studies","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06947264793910002,"gpt":0.3450419761909217,"spread":0.2755693282518217,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004830172,0.0003341823,0.00062961,0.001170425,0.001432902,0.0002087389,0.001099391,0.0005879758,0.00009030326],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02869374,0.0003136283,0.00009973581,0.0003138913,0.002654484,0.0003547071,0.00007792718,0.001044075,0.000006376407],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001100531,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01358549,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.212735,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.985279,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9955087,0.0008026385,0.0009148718,0.0004401429,0.0002197824,0.002113865],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9909955,0.005055205,0.0005993738,0.0003427531,0.001011938,0.001995176],"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":[0.0007465677,0.00005118139,0.01375626,0.0006082503,0.0001151711,0.003438059,0.2259765,0.00009309137,0.0004555207,0.3856699,0.0009614191,0.368128],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001306884,0.0009031225,0.29086,0.001357308,0.004573501,0.004839717,0.512759,0.0003270891,0.0003625321,0.09912463,0.08258299,0.001003138],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9833622,0.007043562,0.0003195735,0.003044945,0.0008631882,0.000194284,0.00003322029,0.00001331552,0.005125709],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9937092,0.002014505,0.002873524,0.0008385228,0.0004472924,0.000008904958,0.000001642518,0.00003463657,0.00007177826],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.772544,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999316,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2215262007","doi":"10.1177/0739986315620374","title":"The Influence of Defendant Immigration Status, Country of Origin, and Ethnicity on Juror Decisions","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","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":"Culpability; Immigration; Ethnic group; Psychology; Outgroup; In-group favoritism; Criminology; Social psychology; Ingroups and outgroups; Race (biology); Political science; Law; Sociology; Social identity theory; Social group; Gender studies","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1170325499859595,"gpt":0.4206576316466464,"spread":0.3036250816606869,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004380342,0.00009383228,0.000235978,0.0001480638,0.000514764,0.00009346509,0.0006427279,0.00006473634,0.0000100128],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001669434,0.00005612636,0.00005729661,0.0008215951,0.001721825,0.0005937887,0.00005999696,0.0001900313,0.000001876007],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008981582,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001530996,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009992209,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002363942,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9969896,0.0002295168,0.0006291242,0.0001460737,0.001732769,0.0002729309],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9969349,0.0008338299,0.0009342775,0.0001311513,0.0009566879,0.0002091862],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001192835,0.001520592,0.396738,0.00003252051,0.00005727001,0.00005562618,0.07514237,0.005095411,0.01745449,0.1379332,0.008536782,0.3562409],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001633409,0.006656826,0.7856331,0.0009632928,0.0002649945,0.00007526938,0.08264455,0.00007589426,0.002271647,0.02688493,0.09229858,0.0005974736],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9977702,0.001123808,0.00006529361,0.0003588525,0.0003319457,0.00008895396,0.000009106011,0.000005298922,0.0002465319],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9977927,0.001270691,0.0008201419,0.00003063641,0.00003628067,9.09245e-7,1.353726e-7,0.000003482108,0.00004504235],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3888952,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6344135,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2889056253","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.2017-0047.r2","title":"The Influence of Witness Intoxication, Witness Race, and Defendant Race on Mock Juror Decision Making","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","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":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Eyewitness testimony; Verdict; Psychology; Eyewitness identification; Indigenous; Race (biology); Criminology; White (mutation); Social psychology; Law; Political science; Sociology; Gender studies","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07620801820199738,"gpt":0.3588550105829719,"spread":0.2826469923809746,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00360924,0.0003380074,0.0005791513,0.0006496739,0.00184315,0.000212387,0.001159778,0.0004757507,0.00003646387],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02460191,0.0002961022,0.00009085706,0.0002979694,0.004716039,0.0004212275,0.00009782316,0.0009106416,0.000006470782],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0005383833,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004823414,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003586892,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1185649,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9963389,0.0007564495,0.0008633255,0.0004693887,0.0002536743,0.001318235],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9900535,0.005914493,0.0008659997,0.0004465596,0.001677289,0.001042146],"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":[0.001341883,0.00008731562,0.003731795,0.001276267,0.0001572743,0.001411988,0.1085713,0.001407754,0.0006154103,0.6956688,0.001338959,0.1843912],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00163916,0.0024965,0.4797494,0.002810905,0.008272459,0.006955586,0.3083616,0.0002687236,0.0007240082,0.1600845,0.0273588,0.001278441],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9881218,0.002093188,0.003575952,0.003699728,0.0006307008,0.0001956733,0.00001614979,0.00002018217,0.001646607],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9937245,0.001633264,0.002915396,0.001162625,0.0003545644,0.00001160974,9.838074e-7,0.0000321264,0.0001649437],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5355844,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999491,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2143933647","doi":"10.1177/0093854810373587","title":"Factors Affecting Juror Decisions in Historic Child Sexual Abuse Cases Involving Continuous Memories","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Criminal Justice and Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Psychology; Sexual abuse; Sentence; Social psychology; Suicide prevention; Poison control; Medicine; Law; Medical emergency; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.09227811425558172,"gpt":0.3722633094961321,"spread":0.2799851952405503,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005704938,0.0002084114,0.0002775896,0.0002454916,0.001179328,0.0002358315,0.000299394,0.0001860036,0.00008565176],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004951883,0.000186162,0.00004361718,0.0003978572,0.0003589268,0.0004676419,0.00007559082,0.0005350513,0.00001156347],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007441338,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000146645,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009087385,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01788836,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982992,0.00009311095,0.0003118994,0.0004094644,0.0004462819,0.0004400371],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973437,0.0019266,0.000135383,0.0002078799,0.0001767919,0.0002096979],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001239962,0.001424396,0.1612039,0.0005389167,0.00001610536,0.001476406,0.520711,0.000004412989,0.00966093,0.002617958,0.00094862,0.3012734],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004801175,0.0002263741,0.3787042,0.0001602681,0.003200847,0.00009755247,0.6099851,0.000003102803,0.0008850531,0.00005029763,0.005561233,0.0006458741],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9967874,0.0005129412,0.00002128605,0.00003995766,0.001809503,0.000231174,0.0000102032,0.00009731566,0.0004902502],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9984592,0.0001234194,0.0005727726,0.00006481895,0.0003685532,0.00001715731,0.000004067869,0.00002170463,0.0003683417],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3006275,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9982126,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2810768571","doi":"10.23907/2017.044","title":"A Brief History of the Expert Witness","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Academic Forensic Pathology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":20,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Ottawa Hospital","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Witness; Expert opinion; Law; Forensic psychology; Admissible evidence; Political science; History; Criminology; Psychology; Medicine","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07606509712946034,"gpt":0.3701755410477138,"spread":0.2941104439182534,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008688599,0.0000895639,0.0002045679,0.0000402201,0.0004497233,0.00000861811,0.001487279,0.0003219112,0.0000802397],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003636703,0.00006637214,0.00007529746,0.00005834456,0.00396076,0.0001866073,0.0002796248,0.000365508,0.00002071773],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001605356,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005277911,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003949474,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002746814,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987296,0.0001816719,0.0002367818,0.0002353621,0.0003326877,0.0002838826],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985391,0.0001903332,0.0004352242,0.0006623221,0.0001210991,0.00005189913],"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":[0.00006011696,0.00003880462,0.0256329,0.00002335423,0.00002233001,0.0000559485,0.06569808,0.000002895961,0.00528539,0.4057233,0.2402449,0.257212],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000318213,0.00002330825,0.05150599,0.00006816172,0.00001599584,0.00003181369,0.0009052249,0.000004949428,0.0007817677,0.06635842,0.8798191,0.0001670397],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8428323,0.005322287,0.0003555221,0.01213792,0.008277562,0.0003221737,0.000006182997,0.0001113541,0.1306347],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9874252,0.0003088733,0.0002434442,0.001349449,0.0002698643,0.00001142607,2.730976e-7,0.00001058426,0.0103809],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6395742,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9987499,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W139693827","doi":"10.25916/sut.26268931","title":"Current identification procedure practices: a survey of Ontario police officers","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Swinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","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":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Witness; Criminal justice; Presentation (obstetrics); Queen (butterfly); Media studies; Library science; Sociology; Criminology; Political science; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1052837545602181,"gpt":0.403444767337341,"spread":0.2981610127771229,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005976936,0.0002024741,0.0004561489,0.002133772,0.0008521577,0.00006633236,0.002104737,0.0004671824,0.0004659792],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004582321,0.0002386978,0.0001247605,0.00551015,0.002451423,0.0007172413,0.0004832568,0.001085471,0.00006392562],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001160699,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006698177,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.550205,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6429675,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9956112,0.0005237837,0.0005394885,0.0006918425,0.001829137,0.0008045863],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9934773,0.0007102728,0.001097149,0.0007902361,0.003785497,0.0001394939],"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":[0.001480781,0.003870327,0.7316712,0.0007114155,0.0003571067,0.00006051197,0.028874,0.0001773932,0.007749727,0.05947531,0.08573724,0.07983502],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001381393,0.0003149767,0.4663583,0.0004352342,0.00009224799,0.000005924229,0.01787955,0.00002658624,0.003368085,0.008801852,0.5008164,0.0005194734],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9774404,0.001107824,0.0002789699,0.002215108,0.0001630915,0.0008249069,0.00004408445,0.0002213461,0.01770425],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9900453,0.0004575816,0.001029812,0.000003395845,0.00004911934,0.000002225461,0.00002723043,0.00001789046,0.008367447],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4150791,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989329,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2131748994","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.12832","title":"Educating Jurors about Forensic Evidence: Using an Expert Witness and Judicial Instructions to Mitigate the Impact of Invalid Forensic Science Testimony","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Forensic Sciences","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Ontario Tech University; Lakeridge Health","funders":"","keywords":"Expert witness; Forensic science; Witness; Conviction; Verdict; Forensic psychology; Psychology; Law; Sexual assault; Cross-examination; Criminology; Political science; Human factors and ergonomics; Poison control; Medicine; Medical emergency","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.2328730072914567,"gpt":0.4838248592125194,"spread":0.2509518519210627,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.008594657,0.0002199248,0.0004446901,0.0007691382,0.002039575,0.0006661877,0.001483588,0.00007241104,0.00002192319],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01352189,0.000136518,0.0001391661,0.004223045,0.009781398,0.00333381,0.0002092504,0.0002531851,0.000002319572],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003288428,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007706031,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003086798,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008973114,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9954389,0.0002584636,0.0008116707,0.0004066088,0.002443646,0.0006406763],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9945809,0.0008172996,0.001064937,0.0002897682,0.00255412,0.0006930188],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003243003,0.0002855665,0.06560043,0.00003213966,0.00008875352,0.0000313928,0.1694961,0.03016897,0.01085516,0.008990763,0.004519406,0.7096069],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002295028,0.01185574,0.3054312,0.007261094,0.0004470934,0.0030749,0.3384962,0.01420164,0.02742488,0.2857743,0.001275204,0.002462679],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9946014,0.0008662748,0.000438194,0.001382347,0.001698929,0.000242133,0.000002847483,0.00001698531,0.0007508701],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9785025,0.00004266325,0.02062388,0.0001490666,0.0006496776,0.000002573871,8.215279e-8,0.00001143407,0.00001810257],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7071443,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992597,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3215796305","doi":"10.29173/mlj894","title":"Revisiting Representativeness in the Manitoban Criminal Jury","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Manitoba Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","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":"Queen's University; University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Representativeness heuristic; Jury; Political science; Criminology; Law; Psychology; Social psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06620044348418722,"gpt":0.3729017499821353,"spread":0.3067013064979481,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006088769,0.0001268944,0.0001845464,0.0001028025,0.001818915,0.0008085297,0.0009648061,0.00007033718,0.0001303337],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001151645,0.00009277486,0.00008732212,0.0003802963,0.0002770741,0.0004710543,0.00006969869,0.0005543405,0.0000889136],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001117838,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007462409,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004956346,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06640072,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9964694,0.001528528,0.0004023002,0.0002174557,0.0009463771,0.0004359178],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982588,0.0009719447,0.0002352163,0.000236906,0.0002000746,0.00009708606],"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":[0.00005566509,0.000080333,0.009072938,0.00004031254,0.00001480796,0.0003249208,0.01742952,0.00005923667,0.00003272967,0.3751176,0.001586951,0.596185],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006387635,0.00008107645,0.06473047,0.0003418749,0.00005796447,0.0004716075,0.4093602,0.00003208651,0.0000890847,0.09894758,0.4248454,0.0004039122],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7808915,0.0002786292,0.001851495,0.004536672,0.0009875989,0.0002148307,0.000001169188,0.00005650048,0.2111816],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9954813,0.00006005182,0.0007318042,0.001164507,0.002500921,0.00000625422,5.354336e-7,0.00001389376,0.00004078813],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.595781,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994806,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1905940450","doi":"10.1002/bsl.996","title":"Talking about a Black Man: The Influence of Defendant and Character Witness Race on Jurors' Use of Character Evidence","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Behavioral Sciences & the Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":16,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Society for Personality and Social Psychology","keywords":"Witness; Character (mathematics); Psychology; Social psychology; Race (biology); White (mutation); Affect (linguistics); Law; Communication; Sociology; Political science; Gender studies","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.2255442337461657,"gpt":0.3892782737957272,"spread":0.1637340400495614,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002357003,0.0001720567,0.0002529692,0.00006834441,0.0008607507,0.0002150012,0.001388001,0.00007966714,0.00008731069],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003199426,0.00009256981,0.0000754525,0.0007599107,0.007247306,0.001497131,0.0002525356,0.0002013875,0.00001849141],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002465551,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001503671,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003844111,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001309808,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9973722,0.0003307554,0.0004089904,0.0003946125,0.001084692,0.0004088046],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980338,0.0006987324,0.0004940193,0.0004312482,0.0002574266,0.00008476653],"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":[0.0004339051,0.0007233547,0.2418358,0.00009668727,0.00002826721,0.0000310035,0.1904181,0.000118028,0.01611865,0.5157857,0.0001653647,0.03424515],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001295705,0.0003278005,0.9801753,0.0007187829,0.00008899601,0.00000726601,0.002721239,0.00001512472,0.004179273,0.003434047,0.007905407,0.0002971796],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9973506,0.0001091628,0.00001018098,0.001326912,0.0001671933,0.0003746354,0.000009058531,0.00002549737,0.0006267516],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9987636,0.0001484466,0.0002382119,0.0005409239,0.00004413402,0.00001670263,1.947156e-7,0.000008727129,0.0002390614],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7383395,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9954544,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3018650203","doi":"10.1093/mind/fzaa007","title":"Statistical Evidence, Normalcy, and the Gatecrasher Paradox","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Mind","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Counterexample; Luck; Statistical evidence; Epistemology; Relation (database); Philosophy; Empirical evidence; Mathematical economics; Positive economics; Economics; Mathematics; Econometrics; Computer science; Discrete mathematics; Data mining","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1009168470561775,"gpt":0.3762227647994362,"spread":0.2753059177432586,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005849965,0.00005217534,0.00009663373,0.00001099638,0.0002514817,0.0001409108,0.0001992984,0.00003620183,0.001035185],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00254095,0.00003326121,0.00001611526,0.0001864783,0.0005782066,0.0001350108,0.00005756276,0.00008969893,0.0003064653],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000007358264,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008311061,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007603108,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001036342,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991096,0.0001511954,0.0001132222,0.0001512564,0.0003212446,0.0001534536],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985173,0.00122921,0.00003323411,0.00007227674,0.00004137273,0.0001065757],"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":[0.0006053584,0.00004151227,0.01614395,0.00005317891,0.00004059315,0.00008017275,0.09639368,0.00002078143,0.0000590603,0.1881997,0.08883502,0.6095271],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000778557,0.0000617692,0.0172751,0.00004910238,0.00004516177,0.000003139117,0.004583254,0.0003466038,0.00007552162,0.01499405,0.961573,0.0002147345],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7233685,0.004775329,0.01581286,0.1525853,0.0005046075,0.0008774023,0.00002451332,0.0001137743,0.1019378],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.996501,0.0001060687,0.001279257,0.001241586,0.0001538762,0.000005367546,2.713701e-7,0.000004146377,0.0007083915],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.872738,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999878,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3085748981","doi":"10.1080/13218719.2020.1793819","title":"Jury decision-making: the impact of engagement and perceived threat on verdict decisions","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Psychiatry Psychology and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Psychology; Conviction; Conservatism; Social psychology; Perception; Politics; Biology and political orientation; Relevance (law); Political science; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06431032613786801,"gpt":0.423674804267659,"spread":0.359364478129791,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008081229,0.0001748563,0.0002612089,0.00006453553,0.0009129079,0.00006400805,0.0004195099,0.0001643989,0.0003976762],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005874517,0.0001119353,0.0001174731,0.0003481999,0.0007999713,0.0001102749,0.00009552122,0.0003392152,0.00003760658],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001222275,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00009234498,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00003657771,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00009915054,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982994,0.0003474838,0.0003093085,0.0004512783,0.0003171434,0.0002754005],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9976419,0.001659418,0.0001340496,0.0003286048,0.00006852354,0.0001675458],"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":[0.002276839,0.0005904979,0.0433788,0.00002262205,0.0002984745,0.00001415613,0.0250526,0.00009826121,0.00007627131,0.4014641,0.1278354,0.398892],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001314856,0.001211778,0.6886084,0.0002060236,0.00008393842,0.00001578491,0.002939301,0.00003657377,0.00000117905,0.2082928,0.09695221,0.0003371256],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9032251,0.00327672,0.0007057245,0.01534786,0.0008680617,0.0003711528,0.00002272769,0.00006969555,0.07611302],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9910501,0.001409971,0.00162335,0.005661783,0.0002125577,0.000007970964,8.30139e-7,0.00001397619,0.00001951594],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6452296,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7021442,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4252726277","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3643903","title":"The Test of Truth: An Experimental Investigation of the Norm of Assertion","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Assertion; Norm (philosophy); Test (biology); Epistemology; Philosophy; Computer science; Geology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02702883302544206,"gpt":0.3357206537624517,"spread":0.3086918207370097,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003458546,0.00005412069,0.00009177111,0.00003615154,0.0003702247,0.00001831334,0.0004155677,0.0000467169,0.0000122406],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001044602,0.00003163061,0.00006314815,0.0002831898,0.000311334,0.000368224,0.00002515353,0.0003267743,0.000001056206],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002232093,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001434089,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001172165,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000904364,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983175,0.0002160424,0.0002971068,0.00005386626,0.000527603,0.0005878342],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987551,0.0004138565,0.0004803261,0.0001293906,0.0001747772,0.00004656155],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007911328,0.0003249117,0.1815026,0.00001030036,0.00005879789,4.593796e-8,0.02051283,0.00001718448,0.1163162,0.6532267,0.00006840241,0.02788296],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005865216,0.0007447249,0.161529,0.00008957364,0.00006329242,0.00002865367,0.07925635,0.00002389833,0.3968186,0.3596267,0.001045212,0.0001874309],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9968082,0.001713945,0.00007400114,0.0003103109,0.000262168,0.00007050484,8.087177e-7,0.000004605195,0.0007554574],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9993605,0.0002989264,0.00005096207,0.000009921518,0.0001479664,0.000001452617,1.921321e-7,0.000005710669,0.0001243719],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2936,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2847506,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2550511362","doi":"10.1080/1068316x.2016.1258473","title":"Attributions in the courtroom: the influence of race, incentive, and witness type on jurors’ perceptions of secondary confessions","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Psychology Crime and Law","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Verdict; Incentive; Attribution; Psychology; Witness; Social psychology; Duty; Race (biology); Perception; White (mutation); Political science; Law; Sociology; Gender studies","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0427089870762819,"gpt":0.4069202867636826,"spread":0.3642112996874007,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006124338,0.00005664322,0.0001183463,0.00004431423,0.0003202953,0.00001007116,0.0002152848,0.00007308181,0.0001881721],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002417158,0.00002782786,0.00001633867,0.0002283164,0.00209923,0.0001025787,0.00003312022,0.0001209898,0.000008252289],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000005571814,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006213137,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001257487,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004236756,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991387,0.0003008867,0.0001630172,0.0001431738,0.0001287474,0.0001254717],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987356,0.0008408585,0.00008391833,0.0001804019,0.0001331623,0.00002602823],"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":[0.000124978,0.0002131442,0.03305353,0.00001160219,0.00001767564,0.000002080069,0.0114772,0.000001852657,0.003449294,0.9405432,0.0034974,0.00760805],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003526431,0.0001111988,0.931406,0.00006809337,0.00001568134,0.000003179546,0.002530664,1.690583e-7,0.00004058968,0.02512095,0.04029634,0.00005450588],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9702762,0.0001906458,0.00004463537,0.007250158,0.00008381982,0.0001284564,0.0000247245,0.00000585654,0.02199555],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9982433,0.000467037,0.00002261459,0.001105604,0.00001648153,0.000007564857,9.037283e-7,0.000002627343,0.0001338428],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9154223,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7734702,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2032126517","doi":"10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00516.x","title":"The Influence of Identification Decision and DNA Evidence on Juror Decision Making<sup>1</sup>","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Applied Social Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Credibility; Witness; Reliability (semiconductor); Identification (biology); Eyewitness identification; Social psychology; Dna testing; Perception; Computer science; Law; Genetics; Data mining; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04487340792176357,"gpt":0.4337711459297325,"spread":0.3888977380079689,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003917791,0.0001444924,0.0003413874,0.0002286435,0.0009064206,0.0001420465,0.0008761155,0.0002503099,0.00001954291],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00288488,0.0001082851,0.0001093197,0.0006234762,0.0005873927,0.0003022129,0.00004226614,0.0003941754,0.000023127],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007800373,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001726663,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000001658477,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00001130894,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9971673,0.0001952884,0.0009859115,0.0002776101,0.001080437,0.0002934128],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9948847,0.003016865,0.001179791,0.0002505959,0.0005797549,0.00008832717],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002159308,0.0001292856,0.0001196413,0.000004991226,0.00002020058,0.0000075949,0.007663755,0.0004172869,0.003327414,0.03540256,0.005914608,0.9448333],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008622407,0.00051068,0.4027754,0.0003462113,0.00005745116,0.00001977064,0.002642358,0.000009238473,0.0001881284,0.5718117,0.02054873,0.0002280459],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.990389,0.0003236819,0.002100756,0.003841327,0.0002798366,0.0002006208,0.000001350448,0.00001504394,0.00284831],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9958392,0.0009398285,0.001596316,0.001237472,0.0003514818,0.000002648728,1.065173e-7,0.00000995826,0.00002295502],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9446053,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6971546,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2809255349","doi":"10.1177/0093854818776998","title":"What Makes Race Salient? Juror Decision-Making in Same-Race Versus Cross-Race Identification Scenarios and the Influence of Expert Testimony","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Criminal Justice and Behavior","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":12,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Verdict; Psychology; Race (biology); Salience (neuroscience); Eyewitness testimony; Social psychology; Convict; Criminology; White (mutation); Perception; Eyewitness identification; Law; Political science; Sociology; Gender studies; Cognitive psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05595039035116318,"gpt":0.4222295531914381,"spread":0.366279162840275,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001439611,0.0001748993,0.0002611737,0.0001409411,0.000793299,0.0007824131,0.0004538434,0.0001375619,0.00003240118],"category_scores_gemma":[0.006312726,0.0001384304,0.00003897075,0.0004575654,0.002182628,0.001387207,0.0001768878,0.0001821643,0.0000180773],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005134626,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001315317,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003643557,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001430944,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979357,0.0001810127,0.000477823,0.0004620572,0.0006257289,0.000317693],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9957314,0.002999735,0.0002951726,0.0003308718,0.0005503555,0.00009253701],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.002983551,0.0004499606,0.008048565,0.0003786664,0.00001292077,0.00004076216,0.1834231,0.0001584077,0.003396383,0.003263473,0.0003233399,0.7975208],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00340853,0.0003902575,0.7466383,0.001852573,0.002776287,0.00002328516,0.2388207,0.0003632059,0.00118906,0.0019932,0.001850937,0.0006936811],"study_design_candidate":"design_other","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9963475,0.001662809,0.0002334016,0.0004392728,0.000844318,0.0003574145,0.000004176285,0.00003079089,0.00008032104],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.996352,0.001158056,0.001875417,0.0002285856,0.0001512201,0.00004509147,9.056041e-7,0.00001474342,0.0001739836],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7968271,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8041983,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2553642309","doi":"10.1080/23311908.2016.1264657","title":"Jurors’ perceptions of scientific testimony: The role of gender and testimony complexity in trials involving DNA evidence","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Cogent Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":11,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Psychology; Relevance (law); Verdict; Perception; Scientific evidence; Eyewitness testimony; Jury; Social psychology; Law; Epistemology; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.4132805861461013,"gpt":0.4897991249662288,"spread":0.07651853882012755,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005392767,0.00009785951,0.0003323021,0.0002084886,0.0002797177,0.00003849774,0.0005353,0.00009779867,0.0004150324],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01119845,0.00006023788,0.00005910677,0.0006444441,0.002818099,0.0001907096,0.0001101584,0.0000846358,0.00002490848],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003137315,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001909444,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00009112556,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004789306,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9975256,0.0008860707,0.0005902642,0.0003767939,0.000362571,0.0002586935],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9953594,0.003567365,0.0003403085,0.0003916651,0.0002725492,0.0000687187],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001253512,0.0003436852,0.4796817,0.00003719429,0.00003163852,0.000003165343,0.01470826,0.000004314252,0.3145002,0.0334602,0.004504571,0.1525997],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004498953,0.00008022476,0.8632381,0.0002355284,0.00003365085,0.000004598376,0.002353956,0.00001456114,0.001005895,0.1250696,0.007375778,0.0001382384],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9917661,0.002571687,0.0005120783,0.001898656,0.0003830272,0.0003397134,0.00001911472,0.00002466501,0.002484969],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.998309,0.0003165147,0.001006114,0.0001161359,0.00004600963,0.00001719621,5.293785e-7,0.000006792608,0.000181722],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3835564,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998956,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2464094058","doi":"10.1177/0146167216651853","title":"Stacking the Jury","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"The King's University; Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Psychology; Social psychology; Stacking; Law; Political science; Chemistry","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08068521715389461,"gpt":0.4090171480341999,"spread":0.3283319308803053,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001824114,0.00008547684,0.0001337618,0.00002428752,0.001482739,0.00006109299,0.0002783115,0.0001576434,0.002245255],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003947494,0.00005104422,0.00005991783,0.0001054519,0.001422432,0.00004408792,0.00004676304,0.0001369372,0.000244919],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002648335,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005152174,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001094161,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001907926,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984729,0.0005234008,0.0001466192,0.0002705758,0.0002811322,0.0003054252],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990698,0.0006137296,0.00007672053,0.0001075335,0.00008230207,0.00004998911],"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":[0.000140137,0.00009787286,0.007915924,0.00001309737,0.00005300752,0.000007463705,0.05439931,1.993346e-8,0.0001384988,0.2782229,0.2181317,0.44088],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002175322,0.00001159026,0.06883319,0.000007177864,0.000007881174,0.00000178475,0.002549736,1.907264e-8,0.000001747363,0.01537115,0.9129108,0.00008743169],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3499205,0.0004024623,0.0005557303,0.5852949,0.000470678,0.0001345727,0.00001416199,0.00009578681,0.06311118],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9855337,0.0002216781,0.00009434002,0.009288982,0.0006271931,0.0000106483,4.173913e-7,0.000007753295,0.004215303],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6947791,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998172,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1513751157","doi":"10.1348/135532510x498185","title":"He‐said–she‐said: Contrast effects in credibility assessments and possible threats to fundamental principles of criminal law","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal and Criminological Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto; Simon Fraser University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada","keywords":"Credibility; Witness; Vignette; Plaintiff; Psychology; Compromise; Social psychology; Law; Impeachment; Adjudication; Criminology; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.132842129719106,"gpt":0.4501197221297871,"spread":0.317277592410681,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007400718,0.0001905556,0.0004198472,0.0001087945,0.0002313166,0.00009309479,0.0003257604,0.0003428218,0.0001747104],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004288922,0.0001510512,0.00004383158,0.000182954,0.001398479,0.0002210564,0.0001808588,0.0004648127,0.00001170755],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002195895,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005291969,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008015637,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004593036,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979298,0.0002508815,0.0003860712,0.0006498792,0.0002907673,0.0004926755],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988305,0.0005126208,0.0001020014,0.0002404006,0.00008026298,0.0002342255],"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":[0.0008940796,0.001260623,0.17553,0.0001484121,0.00003529532,0.0001334665,0.003092452,0.000001554826,0.01878393,0.6428123,0.000184994,0.1571229],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001064591,0.001012451,0.9485404,0.00003513998,0.00003356942,0.00003297816,0.0008803298,0.000005486537,0.0005333853,0.03503074,0.012603,0.0002279158],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9598045,0.0002426838,0.0001281619,0.00162328,0.0004831807,0.0003653104,0.000009531248,0.00004666892,0.03729666],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9953874,0.00005636498,0.002564585,0.001558636,0.00008507475,0.00002915611,0.000001964183,0.000007458963,0.0003093191],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7730104,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.615969,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3002573560","doi":"10.3138/cjccj.2018-0057","title":"Social Identity in the Canadian Courtroom: Effects of Juror and Defendant Race","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Race (biology); Psychology; White (mutation); Criminology; Indigenous; Identity (music); Social psychology; Plaintiff; Law; Political science; Sociology; Gender studies","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08680718064480779,"gpt":0.3628542244436055,"spread":0.2760470437987977,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003917252,0.0002953213,0.0006438734,0.0009804039,0.0008834361,0.0002163178,0.001052415,0.0005835261,0.00006427442],"category_scores_gemma":[0.008571903,0.000281872,0.0001159733,0.0002982468,0.001481716,0.0005088508,0.00005046828,0.001252589,0.000007128274],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009984814,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009750481,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3171063,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9640728,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9960318,0.001179407,0.0006437064,0.0003726674,0.0002322958,0.001540142],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.994503,0.003046813,0.0004881263,0.0002605492,0.0005416102,0.001159868],"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":[0.0002025601,0.00007770787,0.01186553,0.004273886,0.0001257814,0.006792366,0.2783356,0.0001168076,0.0002873065,0.6745523,0.001857818,0.02151237],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00171241,0.0008655999,0.5239444,0.0006821968,0.007053122,0.004701019,0.4099043,0.00006179148,0.0001167189,0.02893742,0.0212169,0.000804098],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9851977,0.002681406,0.0001668097,0.006913118,0.0006117401,0.0002978818,0.00001796876,0.000009392093,0.004103975],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9960302,0.0006873747,0.0006994643,0.002163325,0.0002380963,0.00001007812,0.000002312003,0.00002476051,0.0001444334],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6469665,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999633,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2752777279","doi":"10.5204/ijcjsd.v6i3.419","title":"Blinded by the White: A Comparative Analysis of Jury Challenges on Racial Grounds","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Journal for Crime Justice and Social Democracy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Indigenous; Jury selection; White (mutation); Racism; Prejudice (legal term); Criminology; Law; Political science; Adjudication; Criminal justice; Adversarial system; Psychology; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1735331867249572,"gpt":0.484891853234574,"spread":0.3113586665096167,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001192036,0.0001199546,0.0003041597,0.0002011946,0.003711464,0.0006931436,0.00099362,0.0001067312,0.00007241364],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001195511,0.00009171663,0.0002420566,0.0001050766,0.0004864703,0.0004901977,0.0000801979,0.0002431421,0.000004359458],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007381047,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001636017,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00004325522,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002998035,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982105,0.0001578103,0.0003484317,0.000184697,0.0008926237,0.0002059463],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971997,0.0008159602,0.0007100241,0.000118115,0.00108688,0.00006939084],"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":[0.001872418,0.0005684416,0.0006846445,0.00005138451,0.004737775,0.00001895296,0.1787109,0.0000783229,0.0001304191,0.5089868,0.04040308,0.2637568],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004849948,0.0005617237,0.2112155,0.0001730639,0.01180043,0.00001986767,0.1752306,0.0009671466,0.0001900026,0.1371734,0.4568392,0.0009790758],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7440951,0.002338447,0.004701809,0.1566713,0.007812438,0.0006570818,0.0004061915,0.00005792596,0.08325965],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9960259,0.0006946699,0.0001248773,0.0004544708,0.001359175,0.000006453324,0.000006313295,0.000006683895,0.001321422],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4164361,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975856,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2911482230","doi":"10.1016/j.scijus.2017.08.004","title":"What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be? II","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Science & Justice","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"Division of Mathematical Sciences; Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council; Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences","keywords":"Judgement; Objectivity (philosophy); Transparency (behavior); Psychology; Computer science; Subjectivism; Bayes' theorem; Actuarial science; Applied psychology; Cognitive psychology; Social psychology; Bayesian probability; Artificial intelligence; Computer security; Law; Epistemology; Economics; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1020365269573311,"gpt":0.4294392459813529,"spread":0.3274027190240217,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaresearch","sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.003517754,0.0001417093,0.0001593351,0.000161825,0.01362024,0.004400425,0.00210419,0.00009744181,0.0002556426],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01301132,0.0001305749,0.00005290581,0.0006585821,0.003005313,0.01039759,0.00047017,0.0002241916,0.0002016214],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001506938,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001798149,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003778565,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002595904,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9965444,0.00006517716,0.0002299828,0.0005884637,0.001860772,0.0007112621],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9973701,0.0002764885,0.000363364,0.0008490818,0.0008259481,0.0003149777],"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":[0.00007504935,0.0003968781,0.0005028326,0.00008822032,0.00002100072,0.00008042038,0.06952955,0.0001502443,0.005594889,0.4916493,0.06314728,0.3687643],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006904582,0.0002568071,0.009764959,0.0003782398,0.0002916445,0.0000225342,0.1025975,0.0007906122,0.005219001,0.07778946,0.8011997,0.0009990677],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.360329,0.001046998,0.007874512,0.2211877,0.0327743,0.001490172,0.00002620314,0.0007546034,0.3745165],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9883339,0.0003614315,0.003603632,0.002990977,0.000673956,0.00001894847,9.305288e-7,0.00001150039,0.00400466],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7380525,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997079,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1989236958","doi":"10.1093/lpr/mgq001","title":"Recent trends in evidence law in China and the new evidence scholarship","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law Probability and Risk","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Scholarship; Interdependence; Status quo; China; Modernization theory; Empirical evidence; Perspective (graphical); Positive economics; Law; Political science; Scientific evidence; Sociology; Epistemology; Economics; Philosophy","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07071523477077973,"gpt":0.3721160392842198,"spread":0.3014008045134401,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007885765,0.000112538,0.0002051984,0.00004446396,0.000481881,0.0002818629,0.0003754561,0.0001517573,0.0001074362],"category_scores_gemma":[0.006428221,0.00007364769,0.00002709921,0.0006376059,0.001624921,0.0009660244,0.0001347029,0.00073611,0.000004673024],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004610387,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001343327,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03096877,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5974595,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9978076,0.0008399482,0.0002942703,0.0004258613,0.0003574236,0.000274854],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9975962,0.001797577,0.00009797911,0.0003287971,0.00005884474,0.0001206128],"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":[0.0002274366,0.00004872981,0.1237274,0.00002366426,0.000002618276,0.000002003309,0.01019412,0.000007980479,0.00001018106,0.5724133,0.00003278678,0.2933098],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005491067,0.00002921418,0.3595211,0.0002330679,0.00001143719,0.000001681284,0.0001305319,0.00001560524,0.0000292454,0.6080384,0.03131154,0.0001291012],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.972537,0.00614176,0.000006360311,0.0160912,0.0001838387,0.0003356688,0.000001461387,0.00003243495,0.004670212],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9883586,0.01022198,0.0008834714,0.0002445237,0.00007073974,0.00001633991,1.505407e-7,0.000004557854,0.0001996689],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5664907,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9754841,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2029409435","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2013.01.011","title":"Mock juror sensitivity to forensic evidence in drug facilitated sexual assaults","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Plaintiff; Conviction; Psychology; Test (biology); Sexual assault; Poison control; Injury prevention; Suicide prevention; Human factors and ergonomics; Clinical psychology; Medicine; Medical emergency; Law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04488702809208202,"gpt":0.3729014428529243,"spread":0.3280144147608423,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00131206,0.00008191463,0.0001469387,0.0001534413,0.0001050436,0.0001695739,0.0002609583,0.00005097432,0.00009336077],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000695725,0.0000711489,0.00003954358,0.0001415051,0.0001028425,0.0007171505,0.00004466388,0.0002258325,0.00004822326],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005729232,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002180608,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002178709,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009984504,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984096,0.0002216062,0.0003631522,0.000138878,0.0007135532,0.000153183],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983416,0.000567977,0.0001745821,0.00006426031,0.0007101385,0.0001413951],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001339694,0.0009366384,0.3066728,0.00009150254,0.0004279367,0.0003759882,0.06511693,0.00094665,0.002234087,0.2522,0.1389141,0.2307437],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00236855,0.000522003,0.6027639,0.001928591,0.00004847927,0.0003570213,0.02043732,0.0001529243,0.0002121433,0.2451323,0.1252266,0.0008500676],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9668131,0.0003089103,0.000190104,0.02544794,0.002079423,0.00010035,0.000007140954,0.00001024933,0.00504279],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9951284,0.00003942082,0.00211685,0.001617682,0.00038029,0.000001746294,4.181976e-7,0.000004902766,0.0007103086],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2960911,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5571587,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2418860106","doi":"","title":"Lay Adjudication in Europe: The Rise and Fall of the Traditional Jury","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham)","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Adjudication; Jury; Law; Political science; Geography; History","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02401222675378692,"gpt":0.231237696176125,"spread":0.2072254694223381,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00119713,0.0001082312,0.0001879949,0.0001057081,0.0007605438,0.00002615179,0.0007215076,0.0001034844,0.00003091413],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0008456529,0.00007413142,0.00008131946,0.0007144639,0.001107399,0.0002924567,0.0001790209,0.0001546607,0.000005834951],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007912861,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003144161,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007829182,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005271175,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981208,0.0004922716,0.0002585417,0.0002840617,0.0006275005,0.0002168163],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9977691,0.0009694612,0.0005186256,0.0003205779,0.0003584513,0.0000637738],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003665178,0.0007279335,0.4126815,0.0002294233,0.0001580203,0.00006659964,0.07612064,0.00006394509,0.04644471,0.0987739,0.01050447,0.3538623],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001127192,0.00008457922,0.8812649,0.0006514482,0.00008177971,0.00001777824,0.007390361,0.000079824,0.002038223,0.002661599,0.1042948,0.0003075855],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9738471,0.0002612206,0.0002936304,0.005378338,0.0002217208,0.0002291868,0.00001174077,0.00003725995,0.01971984],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9959679,0.0001067677,0.0005130894,0.00003328704,0.00008774458,5.502669e-7,3.296727e-7,0.000009072794,0.003281204],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4685833,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5849565,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2906867826","doi":"10.1007/s11896-018-9311-z","title":"The Influence of Familiarity Recency and Eyewitness Age on Mock Jurors’ Judgement","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":8,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Carleton University","funders":"","keywords":"Legal psychology; Judgement; Psychology; Eyewitness identification; Eyewitness testimony; Social psychology; Law; Computer science; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04462723732052665,"gpt":0.4203936348206344,"spread":0.3757663975001077,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001074722,0.00007978212,0.000198954,0.00009735447,0.0001767449,0.00003850753,0.0003109263,0.00008016104,0.00001791846],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002103156,0.00005308815,0.00003803936,0.0001590752,0.0003935742,0.0001445998,0.00003913679,0.000221981,0.000008109961],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001466249,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006840099,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003399798,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002285978,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988264,0.0001750809,0.0003512568,0.000127567,0.0003266584,0.0001930077],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987766,0.0004045326,0.0003606117,0.0001438936,0.0002266283,0.00008779789],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.004334452,0.00135135,0.1295552,0.0005055966,0.0003194486,0.0001078922,0.192559,0.0001614517,0.01546402,0.1711815,0.02390982,0.4605502],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006983698,0.001179273,0.9021713,0.0001197519,0.00006714234,0.00005683196,0.01240242,0.000001139678,0.00008632641,0.02316212,0.05992291,0.0001324691],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9883567,0.0003370255,0.000009309682,0.002435151,0.0003304937,0.000072281,0.000001119867,0.000003089698,0.008454815],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9960477,0.002322159,0.00007920035,0.000979099,0.000104892,7.587792e-7,5.148273e-8,0.000004343031,0.0004617652],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.772616,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2164872,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2086171972","doi":"10.1111/1467-9930.00139","title":"The Underrepresentation of Indigenous Peoples on Canadian Jury Panels","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Law & Policy","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Indigenous; Supreme court; Law; Jury selection; Political science; Legislation; Economic Justice; Commission; Politics; Common law; Administration (probate law); Jury trial","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05565020373300195,"gpt":0.3921816795303701,"spread":0.3365314757973681,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004025746,0.00006143829,0.00007883747,0.00006157695,0.000953712,0.00008866632,0.000264582,0.00006021576,0.00006103253],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001121444,0.00004797495,0.00003451304,0.0004464692,0.0002447735,0.00007760638,0.000008675302,0.00006565464,0.00006910049],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001468223,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00231683,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5876364,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8823768,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989172,0.0001814848,0.0001424539,0.0001177546,0.000316691,0.0003244685],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989339,0.000576889,0.00007663079,0.0002014081,0.00008053942,0.0001306712],"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":[0.000002491294,0.00001027258,0.0004813909,0.000002900476,0.000005171805,0.000001174539,0.01509447,0.00001858374,0.000009029099,0.9701985,0.0003149622,0.01386107],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001461395,0.00004899178,0.02126565,0.00002351746,0.000009711834,0.000002025351,0.01222605,5.757166e-7,0.001214561,0.1894261,0.7754759,0.0001607875],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3437062,0.000191857,0.00001173793,0.005203262,0.0002691174,0.0002511999,0.00001290589,0.00003686692,0.6503169],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9956506,0.0001668108,0.00003505733,0.001057426,0.000119677,0.000006626717,9.78914e-7,0.000008050606,0.002954747],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7807724,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7335278,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2804938249","doi":"10.1177/1365712718782990","title":"Gender discrimination and juries in the 20th century","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The International Journal of Evidence & Proof","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Political science; Politics; Franchise; Law; Inequality; Sociology; Jury selection","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1937705289059404,"gpt":0.4461225939343225,"spread":0.2523520650283821,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003485133,0.00005548476,0.00007303263,0.0001012663,0.0001965908,0.0002646514,0.001078583,0.00002773528,0.00006940695],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002878119,0.00002594468,0.00003395665,0.0001676054,0.000436522,0.00080879,0.00007453947,0.0001597406,0.000006786103],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006544963,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002344468,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007356226,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005695857,"domain_scores_codex":[0.99815,0.0002371938,0.0002735644,0.00007918705,0.001150514,0.0001095401],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980258,0.0008441524,0.0002751481,0.00008518094,0.0007440708,0.00002569935],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"design_other","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006598383,0.000239665,0.04053565,0.00002624458,0.0001193591,0.00008112573,0.3069568,0.00003470937,0.0006850978,0.1941172,0.01916273,0.4373816],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006273616,0.0003931987,0.3808137,0.001323927,0.00008875352,0.0002877915,0.05484131,0.000102824,0.001166265,0.2834368,0.2766216,0.0002964902],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8896881,0.004621451,0.001500974,0.09642395,0.001760871,0.0002427482,0.000001725901,0.000008872755,0.00575125],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9968737,0.001003604,0.0002421551,0.0009060703,0.0008371599,0.000002409834,1.06456e-7,0.000003228389,0.0001315702],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4370851,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3445586,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1733669877","doi":"10.17589/2309-8678-2014-2-2-9-62","title":"Selection of Jurors and Lay Assessors in Comparative Perspective: Eurasian Context","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Russian Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Impartiality; Adjudication; Legislation; Law; Context (archaeology); Political science; Listing (finance); Independence (probability theory); Selection (genetic algorithm); Choice of law; Sociology; Conflict of laws; Business; Computer science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.09771499217999599,"gpt":0.4211400219479053,"spread":0.3234250297679093,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001168155,0.00008700096,0.0002241001,0.0001454508,0.000323712,0.0001336449,0.0001556444,0.00007038716,0.00008026534],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002780774,0.00007607239,0.00003367972,0.0004469721,0.0003423459,0.0004951723,0.00001957796,0.0002973096,0.000009331885],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002248785,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003300435,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001400304,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02188891,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985657,0.0003848412,0.000260294,0.000140875,0.0004403603,0.0002078866],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991423,0.0001266351,0.0002186936,0.00004970322,0.0002580083,0.000204671],"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":[0.00008753616,0.0000935197,0.0141523,0.000004338669,0.00002306836,0.0000194715,0.05344448,0.00002410429,0.00002931557,0.9267239,0.0007010397,0.004696953],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.003409353,0.0006395458,0.2289086,0.0003554243,0.0000534919,0.0002971155,0.4863806,0.0001043038,0.0008911976,0.16975,0.1085873,0.000623129],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6252191,0.0005904467,0.0002892567,0.003906546,0.0003460435,0.0001603767,0.000003169046,0.00002984386,0.3694552],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9989415,0.00003579013,0.0006436287,0.0000660744,0.0001222007,0.000001226508,1.462597e-7,0.000006545296,0.000182838],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7569739,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.995959,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2905402715","doi":"10.29173/alr1258","title":"The Origins, Early History and Evolution of the English Criminal Trial Jury","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Alberta Law Review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jury; Adversarial system; Expansive; Distrust; Criminal trial; Law; Jury trial; Political science; Institution; Criminology; Criminal law; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04866074385107201,"gpt":0.314241143032203,"spread":0.265580399181131,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007603035,0.00007853245,0.0002008488,0.000005362656,0.0003467433,0.00003095017,0.0004678762,0.0000443065,0.0000710331],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004493337,0.00004431815,0.00009560772,0.0002113363,0.0004738413,0.0001481272,0.00007511863,0.0001245163,0.00001786868],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001327328,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003424773,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003382291,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003266346,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986384,0.0003734697,0.0002833164,0.0001688475,0.0003903719,0.0001455941],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984828,0.0008731233,0.0001979629,0.0002193376,0.0001568926,0.00006983738],"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":[0.0001608059,0.00001368644,0.00008295374,0.0003748917,0.00001099292,2.644854e-7,0.004450311,5.55331e-8,0.000001618277,0.952307,0.02388501,0.0187124],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004584164,0.00004184006,0.0001998692,0.0003511676,0.00008784599,2.230164e-7,0.0001444069,4.284839e-7,0.000001816773,0.0006522841,0.9980044,0.00005732128],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.06264167,0.7152727,0.0000163724,0.02605095,0.003598606,0.002245956,0.000004090648,0.00006222535,0.1901075],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9441867,0.04837424,0.00004589282,0.004003604,0.0007517693,0.00003932157,4.862208e-7,0.00001508689,0.002582862],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9741194,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5379269,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2067126333","doi":"10.7202/039835ar","title":"The Possibility of “Inference Causation”: Inferring Cause-in-Fact and the Nature of Legal Fact-Finding","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"McGill Law Journal","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Causation; Inference; Epistemology; Plaintiff; Causal inference; Supreme court; Law; Psychology; Philosophy; Political science; Mathematics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03163596699700405,"gpt":0.372955400710208,"spread":0.3413194337132039,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003798287,0.00008455502,0.0001827172,0.00005016456,0.002605139,0.000157448,0.0004446777,0.0001286672,0.00004486415],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003376454,0.00004593494,0.0000580538,0.0002273333,0.0008567002,0.000382404,0.00008091459,0.00101951,8.95019e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003825696,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007633187,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001976953,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1061046,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984307,0.0002575615,0.0004155528,0.0001238942,0.0005533201,0.0002190263],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9972883,0.001787115,0.0003743999,0.0001905882,0.000294335,0.00006523582],"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":[0.00006731535,0.00002250172,0.02646854,0.00001035295,0.00001909743,0.000004503888,0.002431792,0.00003162491,0.0003252434,0.9592515,0.000009335468,0.01135817],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002797018,0.0001095284,0.64961,0.0003652018,0.00008936358,0.0001280259,0.01016091,0.0001706586,0.006207959,0.1610299,0.1688578,0.0004735924],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9637715,0.0001439778,0.00002492426,0.001173449,0.0005312137,0.0001247819,0.000008721274,0.000008327672,0.0342131],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9995692,0.000114613,0.0001562062,0.00003791317,0.00006122419,0.00000136485,1.077919e-7,0.000005016119,0.00005436665],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7982216,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9986933,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3125006201","doi":"","title":"The Role of Innocence Commissions: Error Discovery, Systemic Reform or Both?","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Chicago-Kent law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Innocence; Law and economics; Political science; Law; Economics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04378339745405326,"gpt":0.3756166703946833,"spread":0.33183327294063,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001943483,0.0001751221,0.0004774182,0.00002560526,0.0008418996,0.0001368198,0.001210325,0.00008612949,0.0001108485],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001251567,0.00009044866,0.0001465189,0.0007494832,0.0003945657,0.0003780738,0.0001041353,0.0002128656,0.00006548942],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001464794,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003399723,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002252118,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004424521,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9974945,0.0003291701,0.0007358071,0.0002862421,0.000787753,0.0003664817],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981244,0.0004099204,0.0004570122,0.0006871659,0.0001897539,0.0001317428],"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":[0.00003142621,0.00009604719,0.00004614545,0.0007524751,0.00001481646,0.000003206394,0.0005088399,6.636568e-7,0.0000786992,0.8237155,0.003261292,0.1714909],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008224013,0.00006399786,0.000143683,0.009628162,0.00004149308,0.000009779631,0.0006614178,0.000002309839,0.00008532346,0.009933022,0.9791993,0.0001492285],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.002621669,0.7483419,0.0000763703,0.02057028,0.0005198785,0.001982326,0.00002278011,0.0001918275,0.2256729],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7484807,0.2460859,0.0001920703,0.002544373,0.0001156963,0.00003888633,0.000003154604,0.00001383705,0.0025254],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.975938,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6475296,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1592768569","doi":"","title":"Jury Trials for Violent Hate Crimes in Russia: Is Russian Justice Only for Ethnic Russians","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Chicago-Kent law review","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Wilfrid Laurier University","funders":"","keywords":"Verdict; Jury; Section (typography); Law; Political science; Hung jury; Economic Justice; Supreme court; Jury selection; Legislation; Criminology; Sociology; Advertising; Business","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.3751959791712456,"gpt":0.4795894323707514,"spread":0.1043934531995058,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0087821,0.0004103229,0.001547179,0.000133183,0.0006230604,0.0001131093,0.001056158,0.0003007346,0.0009007914],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004118957,0.0003201656,0.0007046456,0.0006972225,0.0003390942,0.000383135,0.0001061877,0.0002894128,0.0001662868],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001566044,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007148889,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002984573,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001473012,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9951722,0.0007984078,0.001697794,0.0008243122,0.0006184238,0.0008888816],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9963236,0.001720944,0.0007910425,0.0006713824,0.0001849834,0.0003080625],"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":[0.0001249342,0.0002832848,0.00001756253,0.004903318,0.00006096153,0.000005287484,0.002890656,2.929744e-7,0.000006280468,0.7970122,0.01647613,0.1782191],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008582442,0.0001482265,0.0006201275,0.006550826,0.0007801723,0.000002770918,0.0002796967,0.000004255158,0.0001445787,0.03832176,0.9518251,0.0004642101],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.001448273,0.6950601,0.008920206,0.04335879,0.005411298,0.02257713,0.0006414088,0.0006819915,0.2219008],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1700848,0.7127632,0.0344107,0.06852058,0.002630256,0.005057345,0.0001122711,0.0003371674,0.006083694],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.935349,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999925,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3123288879","doi":"","title":"Does No Mean \"No\" Mean Reasonable Doubt? Assessing the Impact of Ewanchuk on Determinations of Consent","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Canadian women's studies","topic":"Jury Decision Making Processes","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Psychology; Statistics; Mathematics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04219273539417691,"gpt":0.3722720652405301,"spread":0.3300793298463532,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008884087,0.000160701,0.0003347968,0.0002180701,0.0009253407,0.00009288755,0.000341349,0.0000596617,0.0001764842],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001870753,0.00009207388,0.0001026648,0.0005200439,0.0008978233,0.0001683507,0.0000396104,0.0001028223,0.00002621763],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001021956,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001792189,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.04030893,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2938066,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982898,0.0001718125,0.0003289847,0.0002278225,0.000450573,0.0005309766],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9972143,0.001183968,0.0002622737,0.0002742778,0.0008973656,0.0001677805],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002144449,0.0009172261,0.1255725,0.0009689437,0.002686205,0.0002194657,0.519944,0.002362021,0.001677049,0.1607762,0.1563994,0.02826254],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001478775,0.0008224921,0.09233468,0.001330488,0.0002023203,0.000004711454,0.7075567,0.00005932625,0.0009943098,0.1131876,0.0806203,0.001408339],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9169728,0.0002153964,0.000002018025,0.0005539406,0.0004216028,0.0002397813,0.00006827334,0.0000244701,0.0815017],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.994449,0.00007086669,0.0001119155,0.0001069794,0.0001771492,0.00002753148,0.000001652683,0.00001339084,0.005041478],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2534977,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9660817,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}