{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":27,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":27,"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","author_layer_release":"2026-06-26"},"query_hash":"0fc5a2647482","filters":{"venue":"Legal Studies"}},"results":[{"id":"W1605381589","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2012.00243.x","title":"An inconvenient truth: barriers to truth recovery in the aftermath of institutional child abuse in Ireland","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Military, Security, and Education Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":80,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"Queen's University; Queen's University Belfast","keywords":"Irish; Context (archaeology); Blame; Transitional justice; Economic Justice; Accountability; Child protection; Sociology; State (computer science); Criminology; Agency (philosophy); Law; Political science; Public administration; Social psychology; Social science; Psychology; History","authors":[{"name":"Anne‐Marie McAlinden","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03085831281840725,"gpt":0.3312081396001303,"spread":0.3003498267817231,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02094907,0.0001981139,0.0006693065,0.001615115,0.02010179,0.01557489,0.003210416,0.004243261,0.003659902],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0628989,0.0005869145,0.0004432998,0.002469512,0.02670606,0.008411681,0.01715153,0.008486362,0.0003511775],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02520565,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02457912,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1277681,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1908811,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9753428,0.01413647,0.001274038,0.0007145153,0.001652202,0.006879941],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9671443,0.01910867,0.00581916,0.001393504,0.003183271,0.003351208],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00007555699,0.00008370386,0.01839357,0.0002071412,0.00001611812,0.00307213,0.9044715,0.0001415843,0.0002114308,0.05195175,0.003082931,0.01829265],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000004796901,0.00003551407,0.007450435,0.0002902683,0.000007871872,0.0003981679,0.9780608,0.00008075771,0.00009432902,0.002606369,0.01094894,0.00002169259],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9196292,0.001624332,0.0005554663,0.03643041,0.0001457304,0.00006366209,0.00002774869,0.00001298497,0.04151054],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9963108,0.000628634,0.0001188242,0.001583255,0.00002398261,0.00002017775,0.000008267014,0.00000781382,0.001298271],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1277681,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2540488,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1965454850","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2003.tb00208.x","title":"Confidence and the constructive trust","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":71,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Constructive; Constructive trust; Law; Declaration; Legitimacy; Supreme court; Context (archaeology); Political science; Commonwealth; Computer science; History; Process (computing)","authors":[{"name":"Tang Hang Wu","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03741219411040349,"gpt":0.3505393579168602,"spread":0.3131271638064567,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02589393,0.0005180583,0.0008561951,0.00250414,0.006435078,0.01341581,0.001790041,0.00938131,0.004470996],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06293241,0.0006393773,0.0009580252,0.001602014,0.097873,0.01455533,0.01248688,0.01139022,0.0005931287],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005996403,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006241827,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003523886,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00202903,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9700162,0.01629265,0.001655779,0.002986311,0.006624151,0.002424945],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9445007,0.03697462,0.006316829,0.005425885,0.004655943,0.002125955],"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":[0.000003052677,0.000002725518,0.00008917489,0.00001231355,0.000003021968,0.00002451367,0.0005894047,0.00005462423,0.00001926417,0.9977234,0.0003323813,0.001146145],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000130424,0.00001515961,0.000146479,0.00006671569,0.000005286651,0.00007344552,0.0003537918,0.0001782152,0.00008143957,0.9877072,0.01134785,0.00001125606],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.06239829,0.01024457,0.1353819,0.1478771,0.001425151,0.0002040497,0.0001407934,0.0001220065,0.6422062],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9811496,0.001220181,0.004953249,0.005667704,0.000486216,0.0001063108,0.00001535884,0.00002578448,0.006375702],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02589393,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1369419,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2135616196","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2004.tb00255.x","title":"The doctrine of informed consent: does it exist and has it crossed the Atlantic?","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare","field":"Medicine","cited_by":35,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Doctrine; Autonomy; Duty; Law; Informed consent; Context (archaeology); Bioethics; Duty of care; Legal doctrine; Value (mathematics); Political science; Medicine; History; Alternative medicine; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"Alasdair Maclean","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1150022491504285,"gpt":0.4203610046556388,"spread":0.3053587555052103,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.09545737,0.0004423179,0.002014747,0.001637974,0.008057158,0.01694339,0.004355173,0.02272855,0.003454407],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1105838,0.0007230613,0.0009587407,0.002819298,0.1492397,0.04504313,0.00908514,0.02879913,0.000926866],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01071715,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02513055,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01121329,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007899646,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9263658,0.04537339,0.002923667,0.003904161,0.01771443,0.003718587],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8611009,0.1143169,0.006237243,0.006443178,0.006993276,0.004908409],"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":[0.000007195903,0.000008182849,0.0001780951,0.00007872864,0.000003559958,0.00006067836,0.002787092,0.00002626718,0.00003144261,0.9842987,0.003353261,0.009166757],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002021704,0.00003200605,0.0003530765,0.001714322,0.000009485671,0.0002979182,0.004741527,0.0001210779,0.0001035114,0.8903028,0.1022727,0.00003140098],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.005646613,0.05374982,0.008186062,0.8830099,0.002274505,0.00002196359,0.00002158996,0.00001939511,0.04707021],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5589842,0.07076783,0.0128443,0.3346846,0.01195909,0.0002324113,0.000061758,0.0001226425,0.01034307],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.09545737,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5048329,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2771805912","doi":"10.1017/lst.2017.17","title":"Comparison in intersectional discrimination","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Discrimination and Equality Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":29,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Disadvantage; Race (biology); Selection (genetic algorithm); Racism; White (mutation); Sociology; Gender discrimination; Psychology; Social psychology; Computer science; Gender studies; Artificial intelligence; Economics","authors":[{"name":"Shreya Atrey","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1855808202657577,"gpt":0.4900491910479882,"spread":0.3044683707822305,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03095839,0.0004129894,0.0009765225,0.005580137,0.009148717,0.01105675,0.002888913,0.003904677,0.00870208],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04982805,0.0003330479,0.000948366,0.004596745,0.05737954,0.01273081,0.01422985,0.005439438,0.0004947475],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007294496,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004966155,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007646091,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005889891,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9462281,0.03647526,0.001548198,0.003236714,0.009545929,0.002965715],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9520165,0.0349513,0.003095199,0.004359033,0.004729076,0.0008488625],"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":[0.000009227783,0.000005054769,0.000645626,0.00003359867,0.000005882689,0.00009113637,0.004236784,0.00008135645,0.00003359877,0.989716,0.0005205321,0.004621259],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001541347,0.00006959649,0.002294203,0.0007272354,0.00002735729,0.0003620129,0.0142016,0.00085115,0.0005787301,0.9079606,0.07287505,0.00003710722],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.07910609,0.005458165,0.07610162,0.0230263,0.0008045705,0.0002046403,0.00009956532,0.00006572944,0.8151333],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9821868,0.0007241323,0.008300255,0.002089858,0.0001174613,0.000120479,0.00003031729,0.00002512361,0.006405648],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03095839,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1637256,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2018708350","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2007.00078.x","title":"The basis of the remoteness rule in contract","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":11,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Doctrine; Identification (biology); Action (physics); Economic Justice; Law and economics; Actuarial science; Business; Economics; Law; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Andrew Robertson","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05856460324819201,"gpt":0.342642214587948,"spread":0.284077611339756,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01620588,0.0004885461,0.0008478933,0.001628406,0.004498895,0.007342513,0.002158153,0.006821948,0.006994652],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02305765,0.0005981352,0.00126017,0.00118535,0.0404259,0.01135146,0.004592026,0.008544816,0.001228417],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003820552,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004982875,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002994396,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001252386,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9846318,0.0061776,0.0008199377,0.002358011,0.004913562,0.001099196],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9854527,0.009706469,0.001004703,0.001889154,0.001519171,0.000427786],"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":[0.000001467518,0.000002023589,0.00002519905,0.000004825085,8.403569e-7,0.00001543308,0.0001005363,0.0001158422,0.00001825014,0.9990258,0.0001078474,0.000581883],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000007487483,0.000006542618,0.00004943978,0.00002167426,0.000001466458,0.00004177884,0.00004811471,0.0005050281,0.00004579598,0.9956329,0.003635318,0.000004472989],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.03916102,0.003954461,0.3367798,0.02567078,0.000498172,0.0002824501,0.0001292751,0.0001047424,0.5934194],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8979012,0.001751813,0.07044841,0.003573682,0.0008949043,0.0004615698,0.00006955077,0.00008678488,0.0248121],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01620588,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08570588,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2346217348","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2004.tb00251.x","title":"Judges and politics: an essay from Canada","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Politics; Law; Supreme court; Government (linguistics); Political science; Sociology; Philosophy","authors":[{"name":"Allan C. Hutchinson","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0292248815576903,"gpt":0.2996854901820406,"spread":0.2704606086243503,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003208968,0.0007255117,0.0007509052,0.002906352,0.04386532,0.01526038,0.00248607,0.01105876,0.007513632],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009584711,0.0008009875,0.0004340593,0.00754803,0.01940466,0.004835445,0.002683081,0.009795468,0.001027549],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":true,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1869843,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.1853776,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.983227,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9929669,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9948277,0.0007416046,0.0001224504,0.0004626863,0.002117159,0.001728382],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9950197,0.001994721,0.0001404056,0.00009698356,0.001903044,0.0008451561],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002011693,0.00002438909,0.000916658,0.000200422,0.000009396218,0.0003218873,0.01516871,0.0002092024,0.0001235619,0.2818631,0.6874425,0.01370012],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001391597,0.000003745769,0.002876149,0.000630498,0.000007856859,0.00006118161,0.01081814,0.00007406823,0.00006316666,0.01450342,0.9709142,0.00003349139],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.006048765,0.2103879,0.0003479448,0.5530874,0.00714277,0.00005357925,0.0003700874,0.00002683754,0.2225347],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.247918,0.1701553,0.0010184,0.2272,0.00354605,0.0001734991,0.0002859986,0.0002208806,0.3494819],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8130157,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.942983,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2147152902","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2012.00242.x","title":"Policy-based reasoning in duty of care cases","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Duty; Welfare; Interpersonal communication; Economic Justice; Imperfect; Duty of care; Sample (material); Psychology; Political science; Sociology; Law; Law and economics; Social psychology","authors":[{"name":"Andrew Robertson","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0574952330479269,"gpt":0.3888278032987518,"spread":0.3313325702508249,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.1172092,0.000542701,0.001375054,0.005483122,0.01314475,0.01535653,0.006055957,0.01260288,0.004841631],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1466258,0.001117197,0.00143797,0.003093047,0.0332931,0.01515593,0.008738046,0.009474787,0.000499626],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03011156,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0342807,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06557298,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0484149,"domain_scores_codex":[0.880072,0.06656301,0.007032703,0.008486304,0.02647645,0.01136951],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8592956,0.119484,0.00614302,0.004738916,0.008813475,0.001524995],"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":[0.000008916542,0.00001984727,0.0009276628,0.00003819436,0.00001021787,0.0002668244,0.00648434,0.0009484801,0.00009979927,0.987325,0.0008285502,0.003042098],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003156557,0.00001706582,0.001434801,0.0004410479,0.00002141867,0.0001817946,0.0103945,0.004045915,0.0005816155,0.9436916,0.03909515,0.00006340142],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1831014,0.00363648,0.2313916,0.1146257,0.0007911787,0.001002611,0.0002333578,0.0001065325,0.4651112],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9659548,0.0006167049,0.02158501,0.006266909,0.0002109362,0.0002703878,0.00006609092,0.00002694661,0.00500231],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1172092,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6198689,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2045372520","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2001.tb00573.x","title":"History's living legacy: an outline of ‘modern’ historiography of the common law","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":8,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Victoria","funders":"","keywords":"Historiography; Interpretation (philosophy); Politics; Principal (computer security); Law; Legal history; Sociology; Period (music); History; Social science; Political science; Aesthetics; Philosophy","authors":[{"name":"K J M Smith","is_ca":false},{"name":"John P. S. McLaren","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05606189682910321,"gpt":0.3080389669174809,"spread":0.2519770700883777,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001810857,0.0004295429,0.0003118157,0.00481249,0.004057013,0.00898275,0.00103144,0.001451665,0.004358443],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002666115,0.0002434317,0.0001948555,0.005439211,0.02630459,0.01065396,0.002766564,0.002590448,0.0004588377],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008616293,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004841656,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008969901,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01133817,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989123,0.0006089203,0.00004027303,0.0001219028,0.0002122567,0.0001043707],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988129,0.0006857725,0.0001459152,0.0001184878,0.0001376265,0.00009930551],"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":[0.000003952605,0.000007059235,0.0003309002,0.00008989399,0.000003181671,0.0000625108,0.01524921,0.0001160844,0.00004276315,0.9673032,0.003947968,0.0128434],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00000261143,0.00001598276,0.001128312,0.0006262637,0.000003761018,0.000163685,0.01140874,0.0001338861,0.00007025639,0.3137132,0.6727238,0.000009389001],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.03267111,0.3244832,0.01634879,0.05643763,0.003129827,0.00006877321,0.0002469042,0.00009573362,0.5665181],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7468906,0.1814702,0.005603766,0.004833105,0.005076238,0.0001354158,0.0002084463,0.0001404874,0.0556417],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.00898275,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06251591,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2087436012","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2004.tb00240.x","title":"Supreme Courts, independence and democratic agency","year":2004,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Victoria","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Law; Independence (probability theory); Judicial independence; Argument (complex analysis); Principal (computer security); Democracy; Agency (philosophy); Political science; Sociology; Medicine; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Jeremy Webber","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0433774336429216,"gpt":0.3255763760675642,"spread":0.2821989424246426,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007946669,0.0002857987,0.0004578581,0.001498054,0.009607301,0.00918735,0.000899311,0.003648859,0.006678753],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01490064,0.0002891559,0.0003874057,0.001505748,0.03717289,0.006512851,0.006553452,0.007203903,0.0007742211],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005692046,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006305114,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008236184,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01130694,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9907702,0.004185641,0.0002269323,0.001088693,0.001869574,0.001859043],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9900289,0.006103793,0.0009557297,0.001079277,0.0009880145,0.0008442619],"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":[0.000003067663,0.000004249963,0.00009231838,0.000005858476,0.00000211935,0.00001312265,0.0005600264,0.00005438335,0.00001662229,0.9964005,0.001410435,0.001437345],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001823444,0.00001080682,0.000714733,0.00006065799,0.000005519558,0.0000322177,0.0008062877,0.000100947,0.00009162762,0.9288011,0.06935022,0.000007655887],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0439884,0.01048718,0.007359146,0.07833017,0.0005535414,0.00002840688,0.00006218957,0.00002722632,0.8591637],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9614937,0.002438878,0.0008788285,0.00565307,0.0007227733,0.00003664253,0.00003222025,0.00002109524,0.02872286],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009607301,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04202652,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1972815280","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2009.00138.x","title":"The common law and international law – a dynamic contemporary dialogue","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"International Law and Human Rights","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Commonwealth; Common law; Political science; Municipal law; Human rights; Comparative law; International law; Skepticism; Public law","authors":[{"name":"Michael Kirby","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03236490220847146,"gpt":0.3410430943313223,"spread":0.3086781921228509,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01301691,0.0005013549,0.001111305,0.006087228,0.01425458,0.03482635,0.001844898,0.01244733,0.005464084],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009599941,0.0004658268,0.0004589129,0.009854675,0.0987685,0.0358528,0.007726364,0.01490283,0.0004658326],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01839808,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.009317611,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008904627,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01104128,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9845238,0.01030362,0.0003213219,0.001181124,0.002495274,0.001174939],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9800336,0.01596368,0.0007506409,0.001067573,0.0008651239,0.001319407],"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":[0.000002376776,0.000006424388,0.00005541743,0.00002221724,0.000001832119,0.00003323788,0.01028363,0.00004404859,0.00002547747,0.9824741,0.003872665,0.00317837],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00000718471,0.00002196951,0.0005383882,0.0004651789,0.000004010718,0.0001628264,0.0342797,0.0002207173,0.00004125956,0.534992,0.429243,0.00002381123],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02332139,0.1652309,0.006698684,0.4031009,0.003540152,0.00003048717,0.00007661703,0.00005796973,0.3979429],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8208018,0.08516563,0.003764188,0.05518825,0.01232276,0.00009590544,0.00006792385,0.0001642182,0.02242939],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03482635,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.133488,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2781337439","doi":"10.1017/lst.2019.3","title":"UK post-Brexit trade agreements and devolution","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"European Union Policy and Governance","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"Queen's University; Queen's University Belfast","keywords":"Brexit; Devolution (biology); Negotiation; Perspective (graphical); International trade; Business; Political science; Public administration; European union; Law; Sociology; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"Billy A. Melo Araujo","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03053778490965283,"gpt":0.3196914709308446,"spread":0.2891536860211918,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01152624,0.0002181998,0.000449706,0.001814555,0.006340922,0.01139044,0.001105683,0.006860411,0.0101176],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02349494,0.0002519253,0.0004529599,0.002260851,0.01266677,0.004468989,0.01183557,0.004998987,0.0007164495],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0254767,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01066336,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.05151893,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04690696,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9860777,0.006305617,0.0007951359,0.00117272,0.002189695,0.003459197],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9850087,0.008074678,0.002039299,0.001504023,0.00246371,0.0009095586],"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":[0.00007972481,0.00002186066,0.001218237,0.00007499315,0.00001000216,0.0005973729,0.01745113,0.001098325,0.0002974671,0.9645177,0.004039786,0.01059345],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001368298,0.00025401,0.02703543,0.0011784,0.00002667383,0.0006241776,0.06559832,0.002234943,0.001643005,0.1888178,0.7123111,0.0001392358],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.5161676,0.004259932,0.005838434,0.04898445,0.0005314725,0.0001294028,0.0001763116,0.00007282697,0.4238396],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9708618,0.0003966901,0.0004695917,0.001521358,0.00003122724,0.00003705039,0.00003851114,0.0000114197,0.02663238],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.05151893,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1848473,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2796386265","doi":"10.1017/lst.2017.11","title":"Autonomy and prenuptial agreements in Ireland: a relational analysis","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Religious Freedom and Discrimination","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Autonomy; Irish; Commission; Common law; Law; Equity (law); Injustice; Sociology; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Lucy-Ann Buckley","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04825470394405566,"gpt":0.3693254662490878,"spread":0.3210707623050321,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01226687,0.000204481,0.0003317995,0.00272616,0.006133692,0.01107944,0.002340966,0.001348823,0.009280377],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02251069,0.0002577608,0.0006267901,0.003296237,0.01901662,0.007431348,0.01060712,0.002737143,0.0004571887],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02880583,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01452041,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0832618,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06122801,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9845035,0.008021011,0.0005531415,0.0008817211,0.002880429,0.00316018],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9830375,0.008931259,0.003265923,0.001170354,0.002377436,0.001217545],"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":[0.00005341206,0.00007463179,0.02284266,0.0001048004,0.00002194175,0.0005547941,0.1328381,0.0009122855,0.0001304129,0.8292751,0.001274021,0.01191785],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004228993,0.00009600571,0.0569741,0.0007072577,0.00006756262,0.0004814649,0.6373721,0.004561158,0.0003580838,0.1998967,0.09935907,0.00008432573],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.583334,0.0007636345,0.008252493,0.007583646,0.00006061122,0.0002045381,0.0001589472,0.00002228482,0.3996198],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9967285,0.0001324218,0.0004449176,0.0001389552,0.000008682106,0.00002460966,0.0000281584,0.000006985662,0.002486773],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.0832618,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2090019,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1507354143","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2010.00167.x","title":"The case of ‘losses in any event’: a question of duty, cause or damages?","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Causation; Damages; Plaintiff; Scrutiny; Tort; Argument (complex analysis); Duty; Event (particle physics); Relevance (law); Appeal; Scope (computer science); Law; Law and economics; Duty of care; Raising (metalworking); Political science; Business; Liability; Economics; Engineering; Computer science; Medicine","authors":[{"name":"Mark Stiggelbout","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05253551868424276,"gpt":0.4218381476761031,"spread":0.3693026289918603,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02556727,0.0005012631,0.001607386,0.001602322,0.006383939,0.009102994,0.004076192,0.02206097,0.003318126],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05061991,0.0006795287,0.001334874,0.00117631,0.05321705,0.02240255,0.00811905,0.01515528,0.0005463757],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003720959,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003707614,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003434503,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002619761,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9822413,0.007557963,0.0009848323,0.002176544,0.005208342,0.00183093],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9703887,0.02281296,0.002192442,0.002287339,0.001675092,0.0006435207],"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":[0.00002039841,0.00001815688,0.0005539812,0.00004902465,0.00002087008,0.0009081116,0.003004275,0.0002157689,0.0001354196,0.9872164,0.003497428,0.004360222],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001574441,0.00003736309,0.0009023531,0.0002200078,0.00002845452,0.001314841,0.002997326,0.0006619115,0.0002692573,0.9523736,0.04114264,0.00003659484],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1279632,0.01366491,0.06906734,0.3885734,0.003166361,0.000188985,0.0001260255,0.00006664122,0.3971831],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9495309,0.00251962,0.004471128,0.02653504,0.002683532,0.0001391558,0.00003045314,0.00003887894,0.01405121],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02556727,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1352142,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1995581034","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2001.tb00182.x","title":"Is breach of confidence a fiduciary wrong? Preserving the reach of judge-made law","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Fiduciary; Duty; Law; Doctrine; Conflation; Hacker; Independence (probability theory); Political science; Computer security; Philosophy; Computer science; Epistemology","authors":[{"name":"John Glover","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.09780596430543234,"gpt":0.3982202761272676,"spread":0.3004143118218352,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02690414,0.000306449,0.001162393,0.002349651,0.009622549,0.02090894,0.002544121,0.01914466,0.004981216],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1033491,0.0005294114,0.0007073878,0.00218469,0.08782954,0.02452426,0.00990119,0.01451197,0.001247392],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007667333,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01583505,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01805996,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01256322,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9697893,0.01183224,0.001416325,0.002642278,0.008894959,0.005424806],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9337491,0.04264724,0.006345731,0.006716024,0.006960507,0.003581254],"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":[0.000009170175,0.00001550414,0.0008068443,0.0000248744,0.000007038236,0.0001118263,0.006029652,0.00008452027,0.00007226886,0.9840571,0.003687547,0.005093622],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001209057,0.00003262661,0.001402577,0.0003418825,0.000009877092,0.0002238188,0.01152005,0.0002816123,0.0002466858,0.937438,0.04845537,0.00003538479],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.06842713,0.00704247,0.01978281,0.494491,0.0009052448,0.00005037218,0.0001062631,0.00006062831,0.409134],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9661244,0.001692451,0.001564988,0.02077396,0.0003296108,0.00003832948,0.00001743426,0.00003306256,0.00942572],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02690414,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1422844,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3123047564","doi":"10.1111/lest.12110","title":"Obligations in the shade: the application of fiduciary directors' duties to shadow directors","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Fiduciary; Shadow (psychology); Discretion; Law; Test (biology); Power (physics); Business; Law and economics; Accounting; Economics; Political science; Psychology; Duty","authors":[{"name":"Colin R. Moore","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04584346994252859,"gpt":0.3634581018970603,"spread":0.3176146319545318,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007046362,0.0002294721,0.000450552,0.001437575,0.007428383,0.0054056,0.00113522,0.002988507,0.00429099],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0214732,0.0003700109,0.0004274321,0.001025419,0.0341755,0.006089233,0.006258896,0.004936205,0.0004187506],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009717173,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01222724,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0892143,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1090792,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9903215,0.003044693,0.0002692201,0.0009031458,0.003599529,0.001862047],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9914915,0.004723954,0.0006470961,0.0008739385,0.001591369,0.0006721423],"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":[0.000003326986,0.000004360406,0.0003903923,0.000006537822,0.000001057019,0.00006094737,0.004079343,0.00006414008,0.00004856039,0.9913703,0.001119471,0.002851437],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004018941,0.00004044811,0.00627022,0.0002379647,0.0000191478,0.0002837689,0.008849176,0.001002264,0.0005520064,0.8101487,0.172501,0.00005509301],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.08219871,0.001808469,0.01623387,0.02381872,0.0003728307,0.0000562806,0.00003422013,0.00003259797,0.8754442],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9644225,0.0004356768,0.002073352,0.004959074,0.0001782158,0.00003910459,0.00001193673,0.00001926025,0.02786076],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0892143,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.17739,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2162797822","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2000.tb00138.x","title":"Illegal transactions: chaos or discretion?","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Commission; Statutory law; Discretion; Commonwealth; Law; Law reform; Judicial discretion; Political science; Common law; Judicial review","authors":[{"name":"R. A. Buckley","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05893827733802574,"gpt":0.3834800210036837,"spread":0.324541743665658,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.006716554,0.0001936215,0.000596795,0.002477046,0.00429154,0.01168387,0.001197705,0.002961267,0.004054511],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02710027,0.0003627987,0.0003914014,0.002288172,0.05649504,0.01503821,0.007300179,0.003606431,0.0005551385],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004604154,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005093466,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005550693,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00609675,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9919828,0.00384444,0.0005316053,0.0008541534,0.001757865,0.001029229],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9666353,0.02098932,0.004947012,0.003846359,0.00197891,0.001603155],"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":[0.000007761472,0.000005622641,0.0007511293,0.00002298409,0.000002011817,0.00006638103,0.0054175,0.0002482647,0.00003619611,0.987349,0.001371568,0.004721548],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000008017409,0.00001516078,0.001625784,0.0001794051,0.00000381032,0.0001268992,0.008073289,0.0009208812,0.00005660101,0.9505401,0.03843147,0.00001859618],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2590627,0.01136304,0.04600199,0.2368976,0.0006616616,0.0001131965,0.0002039285,0.0001173266,0.4455785],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9860217,0.001714466,0.002089182,0.002012411,0.0003679947,0.00004710346,0.00002727949,0.00002459866,0.007695165],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01168387,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.03552091,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2027430988","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2005.tb00270.x","title":"Revisiting pure economic loss: lessons to be learnt from the Supreme Court of Canada?","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; CLARITY; Law; Transparency (behavior); Common law; Position (finance); Test (biology); Convergence (economics); Political science; High Court; Law and economics; Economics","authors":[{"name":"Paula Giliker","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05625833674962344,"gpt":0.3372516722005559,"spread":0.2809933354509324,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01207995,0.0006612338,0.001293145,0.005365537,0.01857303,0.02016798,0.004773187,0.007640701,0.003307826],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03050397,0.0005291051,0.0008250975,0.007703455,0.03854171,0.01056034,0.006032416,0.01267452,0.0003346092],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1656805,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.3160672,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9932826,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9952152,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9829699,0.002302707,0.0005467402,0.001215886,0.008836344,0.004128401],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9770737,0.008384467,0.000732592,0.0006820094,0.01136725,0.001759873],"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":[0.00001930717,0.00001800234,0.00163461,0.0001631606,0.00002959345,0.0003196108,0.007812935,0.0006958279,0.0001108768,0.9202123,0.03761564,0.03136801],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006637898,0.00002988239,0.01397777,0.002509458,0.0001562946,0.0002837214,0.03414568,0.002279403,0.0004752669,0.4652203,0.480528,0.0003279215],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.04050023,0.1241781,0.005980403,0.6290326,0.003530855,0.00006723633,0.0004493857,0.00008965404,0.1961716],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7831364,0.07458599,0.006007676,0.110511,0.00192489,0.00005498828,0.0002241684,0.0001353829,0.02341961],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1656805,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9676924,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2919726698","doi":"10.1017/lst.2019.6","title":"Revisiting the fraud exception: a critique of United City Merchants v Royal Bank of Canada 40 years on","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Law; Doctrine; Supreme court; Political science; Presentation (obstetrics); Underpinning; Sociology; Law and economics; Engineering","authors":[{"name":"Katie Richards","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04464865428380113,"gpt":0.337203370805331,"spread":0.2925547165215299,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01301411,0.0005906448,0.00111249,0.005391216,0.0236512,0.02005401,0.005847685,0.02152073,0.002593076],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03354197,0.0007573867,0.0009823836,0.004829275,0.04463111,0.005974839,0.004745837,0.02983397,0.0004220041],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1159448,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.1393539,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9663975,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9614694,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9792784,0.002821928,0.0007465592,0.002465548,0.01087506,0.003812464],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9761084,0.01074943,0.0009869284,0.0008191827,0.009818987,0.001517039],"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":[0.00001372162,0.000007087364,0.0005881633,0.00003411448,0.00001215266,0.0003411596,0.00592693,0.0002332015,0.00006886682,0.9421368,0.04589037,0.004747367],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000491423,0.00002863019,0.004297743,0.001607418,0.000116091,0.0002383778,0.009459143,0.001547247,0.0005646039,0.1892731,0.7925794,0.0002390104],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.04580932,0.02726459,0.004926223,0.5662522,0.003785566,0.00009042419,0.0003439706,0.0001446899,0.3513831],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6751427,0.01160021,0.00227161,0.2444015,0.003872746,0.00008581465,0.00008712414,0.0001521335,0.06238614],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9663975,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8412423,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2088623055","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2005.tb00685.x","title":"Citizenship and family life in Ireland: asking the question ‘Who belongs’?","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"European and International Law Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Citizenship; Deportation; De facto; Immigration; Naturalization; Residence; Political science; Vulnerability (computing); Politics; Law; Subject (documents); Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Siobhán Mullally","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04424618320583968,"gpt":0.3414596082103564,"spread":0.2972134250045167,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007695261,0.0002062891,0.0004727559,0.001774949,0.01123791,0.008705222,0.001414725,0.003403421,0.002539164],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01292517,0.0003195388,0.0004119574,0.001831023,0.03294211,0.01077813,0.008055584,0.004208506,0.0003659602],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01894772,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0130438,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1749963,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2049346,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9928744,0.004328922,0.0002466925,0.0003165921,0.0004943385,0.001739027],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9939635,0.002214646,0.0008646585,0.0002665217,0.0007047819,0.001985945],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004592371,0.00008199694,0.02759265,0.0001113016,0.0000153991,0.001133887,0.8463629,0.0001002824,0.00007697561,0.07455049,0.02267617,0.02725191],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00000607367,0.0000226442,0.01578811,0.0002440918,0.000004406028,0.0003918087,0.9207967,0.00005866591,0.00003151058,0.01123621,0.05138737,0.000032356],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6465928,0.01233814,0.0004637123,0.2025489,0.0006445287,0.00003165775,0.0001173636,0.00002743486,0.1372354],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9879714,0.002606414,0.0001268186,0.005855261,0.00009304828,0.00002539196,0.00003157104,0.00001027564,0.003279819],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1749963,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3479553,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4404977473","doi":"10.1017/lst.2024.28","title":"Bringing the idea of the environment to law: a comparative study of early environmental law textbooks","year":2024,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Environmental law and policy","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"Australian Research Council","keywords":"Law; Environmental law; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Susan Bartie","is_ca":false},{"name":"Meredith Hagger","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04635622544898436,"gpt":0.3370933741913001,"spread":0.2907371487423158,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.007911841,0.0001807937,0.0006074179,0.01268778,0.004549436,0.007633517,0.001247787,0.001292693,0.005532779],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0457763,0.0003252693,0.0001236265,0.01764257,0.0134929,0.007337715,0.004005841,0.001849773,0.000268337],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02514257,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00715973,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.09307374,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1969752,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9925727,0.004155506,0.0003877201,0.0003316324,0.002036409,0.0005160255],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9493414,0.03440094,0.004874946,0.0008620524,0.009125686,0.00139507],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003536599,0.0000773556,0.01211356,0.0003670381,0.000008532776,0.0005459784,0.9082666,0.00007990664,0.0002835526,0.05868442,0.002086953,0.01745074],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001001,0.00006305282,0.08466895,0.00129516,0.0000166361,0.0002297478,0.8032357,0.0001965072,0.0003310526,0.004089869,0.1058351,0.00002815752],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.898154,0.004854663,0.000641319,0.004206195,0.00008479223,0.00009044888,0.0001464992,0.00001512449,0.09180704],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9929606,0.002264773,0.0003087847,0.0003948321,0.0000267598,0.00003561865,0.00007415054,0.00002298876,0.003911411],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.09307374,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.185064,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2003922734","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2008.00081.x","title":"Rights-based justifications for the tort of unlawful interference with economic relations","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Tort; Plaintiff; Law; Law and economics; Political science; Strict liability; Liability; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Jason Neyers","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.09846264614462974,"gpt":0.362582794066692,"spread":0.2641201479220623,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01271679,0.0007558161,0.0009044351,0.00360852,0.004982776,0.008273413,0.002879443,0.01460775,0.01507341],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0174406,0.0007047444,0.002073019,0.001120858,0.03373808,0.01343435,0.006134983,0.0101033,0.001624285],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005685317,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00289839,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00278049,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002919416,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9889064,0.003883121,0.0006135806,0.001585787,0.003489795,0.00152132],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9860422,0.008263701,0.001449607,0.002002405,0.001618291,0.000623856],"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":[0.000001446181,0.000004971346,0.0000207659,0.00000493761,0.000001063287,0.00001817761,0.00008160411,0.00005863067,0.00001370153,0.9993543,0.0002328841,0.0002075136],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001702455,0.000006139532,0.000132284,0.00003833766,0.000004713339,0.00005018699,0.00009727472,0.0006290266,0.00008559016,0.9892691,0.009662313,0.000008071755],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.04482499,0.003223778,0.08206892,0.06379977,0.0007767593,0.0001690352,0.0003240551,0.0001119804,0.8047008],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9514973,0.001189092,0.009972931,0.004362164,0.001438105,0.0002367582,0.0001245342,0.00008486438,0.03109425],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01507341,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06725359,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2562963395","doi":"10.1111/lest.12145","title":"Exercising discretion in the context of dependent employment: assessing the impact of workload on the rule of law","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":1,"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":"Discretion; Context (archaeology); Work (physics); Workload; Rule of law; Public law; Law; Government (linguistics); Accountability; Private law; Political science; Economics; Engineering","authors":[{"name":"Shelagh Campbell","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07023885008892738,"gpt":0.3025441416311244,"spread":0.232305291542197,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001992241,0.0002844916,0.0003666708,0.00093657,0.001726753,0.002199255,0.0008907455,0.0006849679,0.001138918],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01338844,0.000287469,0.0002575223,0.0007406633,0.002243672,0.000641731,0.002089019,0.001020198,0.0002510867],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002807901,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002844828,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1237897,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2479254,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9978707,0.0008137049,0.00009478159,0.0001805053,0.0004976902,0.0005426122],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9860897,0.00378677,0.004956389,0.0007204282,0.001146742,0.003299981],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002071791,0.0006487699,0.9804047,0.00002149335,0.00004320575,0.0001653642,0.009308066,0.0002828779,0.0009773459,0.0002369254,0.0001201701,0.007583938],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000003352373,0.00009451663,0.9941326,0.000007065523,0.000006089816,0.00002330993,0.00518752,0.0002206536,0.00006711008,0.00009738411,0.0001532744,0.000007152451],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9994662,0.00002786298,0.00002744283,0.00003135556,0.000001215685,0.000004408833,0.00001288461,3.622084e-7,0.0004283745],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9998227,0.00002692495,0.00003110496,0.000009784361,0.000002518287,0.000003342921,0.00002304224,5.00841e-7,0.00008025498],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1237897,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2461383,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2039722319","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2000.tb00142.x","title":"Environmental monitoring of government — the case for an environmental auditor","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Regulation and Compliance Studies","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Audit; Accountability; Accounting; Government (linguistics); Argument (complex analysis); House of Commons; Business; Environmental audit; Chief audit executive; Joint audit; Value (mathematics); Audit committee; Internal audit; Public administration; Political science; Law; Medicine; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"Kathryn Hollingsworth","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03086616862597272,"gpt":0.2507681898323116,"spread":0.2199020212063389,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.05654663,0.0002247011,0.0006396168,0.002134025,0.02046448,0.02160243,0.002383399,0.01495495,0.002779497],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1031339,0.000847399,0.0006125998,0.003536317,0.03541798,0.01525464,0.009578348,0.01566571,0.0004281584],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01453865,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03677753,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.05346198,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04616556,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9115859,0.05658555,0.002384471,0.005050231,0.01287288,0.01152107],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.8657502,0.08446174,0.01312246,0.01038186,0.01735411,0.008929628],"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":[0.00009012015,0.00009906799,0.01352897,0.00009859672,0.0000278711,0.000707765,0.01759373,0.0007549324,0.0003368448,0.8643157,0.03581549,0.06663092],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001082218,0.0002592588,0.02179644,0.001346521,0.00005982313,0.000952387,0.02393247,0.005085667,0.001534992,0.3754687,0.5692512,0.0002044245],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1265132,0.005375464,0.01181933,0.5735767,0.0007467549,0.0001833885,0.00004686234,0.0002187456,0.2815196],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9521316,0.001706305,0.003095818,0.0246078,0.0004862629,0.0001347996,0.00002004539,0.00005285499,0.01776442],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.05654663,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2990507,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4322770748","doi":"10.1017/lst.2023.1","title":"Security interests and knowing receipt","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Receipt; Property (philosophy); Liability; Context (archaeology); Doctrine; Security interest; Law and economics; Business; Point (geometry); Law; Political science; Sociology; Accounting; Epistemology","authors":[{"name":"Jamie Glister","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07946423820398954,"gpt":0.4071622339799165,"spread":0.327697995775927,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01168077,0.0002450025,0.0005555493,0.001800833,0.00487461,0.007419589,0.00129737,0.006364982,0.006597518],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02347457,0.0003947622,0.0006674373,0.001389681,0.04055759,0.01073717,0.007262341,0.00599942,0.0005789307],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005488423,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005564326,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005448688,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002978174,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9900497,0.004913142,0.0008465714,0.00101128,0.002013663,0.001165597],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9693595,0.01884649,0.004198371,0.003757315,0.002837766,0.00100063],"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":[0.00000576744,0.00001039208,0.0005158909,0.00001758062,0.000003986372,0.0001834437,0.002166231,0.0001396236,0.00008038625,0.9951421,0.000287942,0.001446692],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001501184,0.0000447155,0.001344123,0.000297283,0.00002430426,0.0005202956,0.004145115,0.0007066976,0.0005410084,0.9719332,0.02040518,0.00002305586],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2231862,0.003135113,0.07078217,0.04478405,0.0002201661,0.0001675315,0.0001296602,0.00006375892,0.6575313],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.993314,0.0003812652,0.001102794,0.0007821666,0.00006053665,0.00002478122,0.00001128742,0.000005258911,0.004317965],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01168077,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06177455,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3108774314","doi":"10.1017/lst.2020.38","title":"An analysis of three distinct approaches to using defamation to protect corporate reputation from Australia, England and Wales, and Canada","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Reputation; Welsh; Disadvantage; Law; Corporate law; English law; Political science; Business; Corporate governance; History; Finance","authors":[{"name":"Peter Coe","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.3751401205529468,"gpt":0.3464764557087454,"spread":0.02866366484420146,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004048629,0.000335571,0.0004902504,0.004573882,0.01134641,0.005900554,0.00181988,0.00150944,0.003130076],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01826555,0.0004018658,0.0006246628,0.005382201,0.004612319,0.001298185,0.003187311,0.002926992,0.0001387378],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1025838,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.1111956,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9863668,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9952092,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9892426,0.00150387,0.000259242,0.0003886672,0.004673374,0.003932382],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.980307,0.005549534,0.001467986,0.00044306,0.009201607,0.003030744],"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":[0.0005259931,0.000459614,0.2341356,0.0009446808,0.000334706,0.003446663,0.09157322,0.004089618,0.002819374,0.5249371,0.01806439,0.118669],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000124048,0.0003960407,0.6666692,0.001146809,0.0006457405,0.0009150712,0.1364239,0.005389981,0.002395277,0.01252039,0.1730092,0.0003642416],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.8225855,0.003216931,0.001050353,0.007566541,0.00006007176,0.0003670585,0.000295165,0.00001786992,0.1648404],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9806189,0.001511109,0.0009078629,0.001377943,0.00001076976,0.00007296714,0.0001096962,0.00001122388,0.01537962],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1025838,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7443013,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2091752406","doi":"10.1111/j.1748-121x.2001.tb00167.x","title":"Casaubon's ghosts: the haunting of legal scholarship","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Legal Education and Practice Innovations","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"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":"Scholarship; Legal formalism; Mainstream; Legal realism; Law; Pride; Political science; Sociology; Legal profession; Comparative law; Black letter law","authors":[{"name":"Allan C. Hutchinson","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1363713756447243,"gpt":0.456736296431363,"spread":0.3203649207866387,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01466607,0.0003898684,0.0008926453,0.003123313,0.02933609,0.02291445,0.001928509,0.01197999,0.008306782],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03845232,0.0004141799,0.0005253634,0.003657658,0.05648579,0.01901294,0.01022347,0.01415315,0.001356968],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02253101,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03144377,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.04682504,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.08820636,"domain_scores_codex":[0.988468,0.006782357,0.0002521699,0.0009623052,0.002510426,0.001024738],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.970831,0.01756382,0.001129115,0.002592298,0.00324283,0.004641021],"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":[0.00002260397,0.000009986467,0.0001970011,0.00008040696,0.000004065691,0.000165884,0.01716763,0.00007800343,0.00003745023,0.8497084,0.1129029,0.01962558],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001656392,0.00001251258,0.0002248786,0.0004804057,0.00000427038,0.0002734115,0.01444578,0.0002355662,0.00006639163,0.2909653,0.6932522,0.00002282906],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01025632,0.02706788,0.002242347,0.8553537,0.006206756,0.00001502933,0.00003302472,0.0001246104,0.09870035],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6921986,0.02591839,0.009034702,0.166307,0.007819658,0.0001459529,0.00005538691,0.000408776,0.09811151],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9706639,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1634747,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2067349740","doi":"10.1111/lest.12086","title":"Stanley Fish on Philosophy, Politics and Law, by Michael Robertson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014, vii + 355pp (£60 hardback). ISBN: 9781107074743.","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Legal Studies","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation","funders":"","keywords":"Politics; Fish <Actinopterygii>; Sociology; Philosophy; Law; Media studies; Political science; Fishery; Biology","authors":[{"name":"Leah Trueblood","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03129358302620201,"gpt":0.271008895156151,"spread":0.239715312129949,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001906735,0.002182603,0.001198396,0.004518619,0.00132717,0.003654,0.001453115,0.002956245,0.0492378],"category_scores_gemma":[0.003884628,0.00142278,0.0006271507,0.0056425,0.002642964,0.009031833,0.001992147,0.003234884,0.02656459],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003386959,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003937793,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01754716,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03751284,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992275,0.000193393,0.00007233717,0.0001236426,0.0003248817,0.00005835126],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987501,0.00064047,0.0001285744,0.00007079213,0.0002816981,0.0001283587],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002227499,0.00001054617,0.00007816787,0.0004962023,0.000009561489,0.00003453607,0.0003176232,0.000129984,0.0000978989,0.01141066,0.9197859,0.06760664],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000007084642,0.000006589445,0.0005052512,0.0009866322,0.000004949071,0.0001132994,0.0002847254,0.00005539239,0.00006604876,0.01253499,0.9854254,0.000009556695],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001533337,0.9503041,0.0007744166,0.02190706,0.003499494,0.00001547491,0.0002509581,0.00008670681,0.02300844],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.006790177,0.7941976,0.002197155,0.00542729,0.004037682,0.00007498593,0.000480718,0.0002318769,0.1865625],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0492378,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1647168,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}