{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":22,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":22,"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":"d8d55b493731","filters":{"venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion"}},"results":[{"id":"W2247834840","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwv024","title":"<i>Holt v Hobbs</i>","year":2015,"lang":"he","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Legal Cases and Commentary","field":"Medicine","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Compromise; Petitioner; Law; Supreme court; Statutory law; Quarter (Canadian coin); Political science; Majority opinion; Sociology; History; Archaeology","authors":[{"name":"Michael Worley","is_ca":false},{"name":"D. Thayer","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02665931980204436,"gpt":0.2802877673961699,"spread":0.2536284475941255,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000518191,0.0001759416,0.0004244104,0.00007123188,0.00008845801,0.00005925939,0.0000994086,0.0001218837,0.0000356608],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003026266,0.000119582,0.0001795712,0.00008166108,0.0001100423,0.0002054474,0.00006672292,0.000461197,0.0000140174],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008268587,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001594945,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003186351,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00001591572,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985721,0.00006641668,0.0005516471,0.0001209706,0.0004446076,0.0002443333],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986003,0.00004764837,0.000340957,0.0001609315,0.0002425334,0.0006076217],"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":[0.007636546,0.001173794,0.0093381,0.0005948403,0.0008642465,0.008172683,0.003186861,0.00003004977,0.005446782,0.07393497,0.8698692,0.01975189],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.004277928,0.003244751,0.0001446414,0.0006795537,0.0004852217,0.005190609,0.0002473661,0.00002134413,0.0009359096,0.001920558,0.9827002,0.0001518843],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6965877,0.1225659,0.0002045292,0.02566404,0.003752652,0.0002243025,0.00001139478,0.00001197773,0.1509774],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9522059,0.03351438,0.0002550315,0.0113709,0.001919575,4.109467e-7,0.000004080589,0.00002179385,0.0007079387],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2556182,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4876413,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3045506765","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwaa015","title":"From the Tree of Knowledge and the Golem of Prague to Kosher Autonomous Cars: The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence Through Jewish Eyes","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Ethics and Social Impacts of AI","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":13,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Douglas College","funders":"","keywords":"Personhood; Sociology; Judaism; Sketch; Artificial intelligence; Consciousness; Soul; Law; Computer science; Epistemology; Philosophy; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Nachshon Goltz","is_ca":false},{"name":"John Zeleznikow","is_ca":false},{"name":"Tracey Dowdeswell","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07635076700284824,"gpt":0.3693862420098921,"spread":0.2930354750070439,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002430452,0.00008384688,0.0002983471,0.00001178098,0.0003858736,0.00006659216,0.0003600991,0.0001685954,0.000004065171],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001181798,0.00003932554,0.0001251256,0.0001672056,0.001619734,0.0001518458,0.00008336592,0.000553376,2.098103e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001291306,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002772698,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005738005,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005086015,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984117,0.0004975114,0.000508157,0.00008526075,0.0003711478,0.0001261811],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9968067,0.002064829,0.0004855749,0.0001032025,0.0004619608,0.00007769123],"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":[0.000170206,0.00003397687,0.000122504,0.00002117898,0.00007461494,0.000001514833,0.3242813,0.00002348016,0.0003398957,0.6634972,0.0006329214,0.01080117],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004498909,0.0007694716,0.0004658039,0.0004378589,0.0002544495,0.000004404425,0.04679152,0.00009876471,0.00544461,0.807064,0.1380625,0.0001567435],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6129147,0.01604271,0.00179666,0.329759,0.0006570494,0.0005070599,0.00002828237,0.000007673441,0.03828686],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9868068,0.01077456,0.0002188899,0.001718836,0.0004572175,6.85406e-7,2.425256e-7,0.000005851213,0.00001696716],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.373892,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8674186,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2043803687","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwt038","title":"United States v Windsor: (Docket no 12-307): Supreme Court of the United States: Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan JJ; Roberts CJ, dissenting; Scalia and Thomas JJ dissenting, joined by Roberts CJ as to part I; Alito J dissenting, joined by Thomas J as to parts II and III: 26 June 2013","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial Processes","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":"Constitutionality; Dissenting opinion; Supreme court; Law; Substantive due process; Federalism; Political science; Due Process Clause; State (computer science); Jurisdiction; Appeal; Politics","authors":[{"name":"D. Thayer","is_ca":false},{"name":"Matthew Worley","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.008336688054690365,"gpt":0.2561875288732041,"spread":0.2478508408185137,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001341832,0.000544481,0.000919633,0.0002753726,0.001701439,0.0008125437,0.0003708322,0.0002796584,0.00005427401],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003933295,0.0003804335,0.0001507607,0.0007201714,0.0006518718,0.0008136337,0.0003598053,0.0003674299,0.000003543904],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005260828,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001064512,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07509507,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004923749,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9957712,0.0004411389,0.001347188,0.0005830841,0.0009748914,0.0008824499],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9964499,0.0003139542,0.001125542,0.0003024102,0.0007914901,0.001016719],"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":[0.0008500562,0.0008122374,0.06548819,0.0006578579,0.0005601708,0.00006406291,0.02851187,0.00006787302,0.02004672,0.007432419,0.8746468,0.0008617839],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001663283,0.0007536027,0.00207876,0.001584354,0.0002132886,0.00008990485,0.003509229,0.0001747121,0.003127385,0.003142185,0.9829961,0.0006671693],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.97655,0.002482768,0.00004244867,0.01636025,0.0006477614,0.001103149,0.00003628097,0.0000567164,0.002720614],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9788325,0.009512075,0.00008828139,0.001318935,0.0003995289,0.00002379544,0.00006422623,0.00007539466,0.009685205],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1083494,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998648,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4388497676","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwad015","title":"Inside Indonesia’s Religious Courts: An Argument for Domestic and Family Violence Screening and Exemption from Compulsory Mediation","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Intimate Partner and Family Violence","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":"Mediation; Domestic violence; Argument (complex analysis); Family law; Law; State (computer science); Family mediation; Sociology; Criminology; Political science; Poison control; Suicide prevention; Alternative dispute resolution; Medicine; Environmental health","authors":[{"name":"Balawyn Jones","is_ca":false},{"name":"Amira Aftab","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02614896637258973,"gpt":0.3204583637783315,"spread":0.2943093974057418,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008164342,0.0001066523,0.000209563,0.0001110056,0.0004239475,0.0001126356,0.00007922874,0.0001082654,5.624107e-7],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004646937,0.00009074466,0.00003558355,0.00008653061,0.0002118764,0.0003549002,0.00003148153,0.0001223914,5.418185e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000264447,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00004684478,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007988713,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00003919666,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989182,0.00009757515,0.0003245336,0.0001696978,0.0002853302,0.0002047004],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991412,0.0002470875,0.0002401546,0.00006245056,0.0001437821,0.0001653165],"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":[0.003786703,0.0004582967,0.1144373,0.0005708609,0.0004221422,0.0004227028,0.07516968,0.001719049,0.03423106,0.2667558,0.00666978,0.4953566],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.009056515,0.002956507,0.5292957,0.003833204,0.0004978091,0.0001883447,0.01668831,0.01252205,0.0007776081,0.3829508,0.03985611,0.001376988],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9908214,0.002972108,0.004583261,0.0002007504,0.0003016698,0.0001890108,0.000007262104,0.00002532337,0.0008992314],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9286813,0.06941967,0.001242713,0.0003662685,0.0002603884,0.000004673322,0.00001118121,0.000009095457,0.000004725649],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4939796,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.370046,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3092013050","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwaa024","title":"Masterpiece Cakeshop and the Foundations of Free Speech and Toleration","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection","field":"Computer Science","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":"Civility; Toleration; Argument (complex analysis); Law; Sociology; Context (archaeology); Politics; Dialogical self; Free speech; Political science; Philosophy; Epistemology; History","authors":[{"name":"Jeremy D Tedesco","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01296776561055154,"gpt":0.2238879050854606,"spread":0.2109201394749091,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002350237,0.000054419,0.0001203088,0.00002740514,0.0001200432,0.0001094963,0.0001176415,0.00003276802,9.939516e-7],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003598696,0.00003370776,0.00002782338,0.00007786517,0.00008971348,0.0002817675,0.00006543559,0.0001010834,2.078762e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000003854605,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00001712897,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00003402016,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00001751676,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9994726,0.00004125258,0.0002135297,0.00008087661,0.0001313519,0.00006039204],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995514,0.00005382428,0.0001628795,0.00008791549,0.00007969025,0.00006428214],"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":[0.0004612058,0.00004317063,0.0006459902,0.0001174708,0.00009839585,0.00003984668,0.005646523,0.00007574468,0.01629476,0.8628739,0.001560325,0.1121427],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.02421706,0.006591785,0.004906692,0.0008410933,0.0004561702,0.007611352,0.000808467,0.1057558,0.0755909,0.3400739,0.4320533,0.001093553],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7435668,0.002711172,0.2154222,0.02915096,0.0003884377,0.0002161097,0.000001816983,0.00001933161,0.008523108],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9913001,0.002165178,0.00574244,0.0006715215,0.00009192445,4.729307e-7,2.47511e-7,0.000002817391,0.00002531478],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5228,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1374563,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2119218814","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rws051","title":"S L v Commission scolaire des Chenes: 2012 SCC 7: Supreme Court of Canada: McLachlin CJ, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron, Rothstein and Cromwell JJ: 17 February 2012","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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":"Supreme court; Charter; Law; Commission; Political science; Human rights; Freedom of religion","authors":[{"name":"C. Beresford","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01771298925432544,"gpt":0.2607400016444446,"spread":0.2430270123901191,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009255392,0.0001787374,0.0003730418,0.00007149806,0.0008694216,0.00004145546,0.0001716042,0.0001576038,0.00007767648],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005919777,0.0001433625,0.00007685502,0.0001150626,0.001318296,0.0007011612,0.00005306448,0.0002417926,6.517586e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001602836,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001633717,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2029781,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1867806,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982266,0.0001494355,0.0005010312,0.0001193785,0.0005078051,0.0004957931],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984118,0.0001698683,0.0004222876,0.0001094454,0.0002779133,0.0006086655],"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":[0.0003202663,0.0003222766,0.07708258,0.000261335,0.000176746,0.00003997768,0.003482143,0.00002890086,0.001902943,0.8013674,0.1128648,0.002150624],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006042933,0.0001896058,0.01345017,0.0004314107,0.00008664809,0.00009775334,0.0007849568,0.000005187569,0.0006823125,0.001063693,0.9823501,0.0002538479],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8302781,0.03164902,0.0003403916,0.004052438,0.0007586842,0.0002778254,0.00005187377,0.00001520153,0.1325765],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9888729,0.007379452,0.000595876,0.0006197458,0.0005482632,0.000001406199,0.000004122064,0.00001276865,0.001965485],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8694853,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8280585,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1751529791","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwv026","title":"<i>Loyola High School v Quebec (Attorney General) </i>","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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":"Charter; Law; Statutory law; Constitution; Political science; Freedom of religion; Sociology; Human rights","authors":[{"name":"Janet Epp Buckingham","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0194864749677954,"gpt":0.2854379150549369,"spread":0.2659514400871416,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000476268,0.00007382066,0.000160026,0.00003720261,0.0002529825,0.0000703798,0.0001205954,0.00007650457,0.00001646956],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001012795,0.00005692821,0.0000613591,0.0000696236,0.0005405075,0.0002563276,0.00001985781,0.0001523519,0.000006373553],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001157178,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001533679,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03624191,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003264985,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990554,0.0001020665,0.0002417069,0.00007041567,0.0003444633,0.0001859358],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989502,0.00005202231,0.0001820265,0.00006051032,0.0002781273,0.0004771104],"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":[0.00002739029,0.00001612486,0.0007470484,0.000002247377,0.00001311087,0.00002073611,0.000214497,0.00001543067,0.00003700432,0.9817237,0.01692562,0.0002571112],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003264479,0.00009220239,0.00009634379,0.00002700876,0.0000235775,0.00005172374,0.0001752655,0.000001033936,0.00004942027,0.01241521,0.9866604,0.00008135799],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2411526,0.002294635,0.0006264024,0.006520209,0.001256201,0.00007464068,0.000006112746,0.00001678383,0.7480524],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.986746,0.002085079,0.001119736,0.003104218,0.001498336,5.293468e-7,0.000001419394,0.000005565718,0.005439179],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9697348,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9701759,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2148946511","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwu030","title":"The Byzantine Legacy of Religious and Legal Pluralism: A Contemporary Reassessment of Byzantine Church-State Relations","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Byzantine Studies and History","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":2,"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":"Byzantine architecture; Pluralism (philosophy); Christianity; State (computer science); Politics; Conceptualization; Faith; Religious pluralism; Empire; Sociology; Political science; Law; History; Religious studies; Philosophy; Classics; Epistemology","authors":[{"name":"Athanasios Giocas","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01290709120699093,"gpt":0.2250268397726178,"spread":0.2121197485656269,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005654834,0.0001413159,0.0004046462,0.00008332314,0.0004512795,0.00007234377,0.000106584,0.00003682357,0.00000757563],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003722489,0.00008553754,0.0001241473,0.00003154963,0.0007281171,0.0002680449,0.00006131855,0.0002057347,3.323136e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000002229152,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005045458,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009178502,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003095311,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986718,0.00007004793,0.0007682531,0.0001083106,0.0002329381,0.0001487071],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984252,0.0001762254,0.0008519944,0.0001393163,0.0003425626,0.00006472268],"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":[0.0002333236,0.00005899114,0.0003369158,0.00006497774,0.0001254943,0.00000823866,0.002762562,0.000002941288,0.0002653088,0.9793864,0.01490486,0.001849974],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00103113,0.0005906007,0.0008105834,0.000194177,0.00007433089,0.00006684983,0.0005447572,0.00002534855,0.00008366369,0.0009751718,0.9955006,0.0001028073],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3605432,0.02159517,0.0001042377,0.006321278,0.0007736522,0.0002005635,0.0000176234,0.00001361832,0.6104307],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9852373,0.01219226,0.00009133065,0.0001580841,0.0002833332,0.000001288014,0.000002361756,0.00001444888,0.002019599],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9805957,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.348812,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2178083431","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwv043","title":"<i>Mouvement laïque québécois v Saguenay (City)</i>","year":2015,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal 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":"Appeal; Law; Tribunal; Conscience; Charter; Political science; Human rights; Neutrality; Duty; Constitution; Statutory law; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Barry W. Bussey","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03963257883280171,"gpt":0.2987751175640989,"spread":0.2591425387312972,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001035287,0.0002076609,0.0004208703,0.00003443523,0.0005299236,0.0001089631,0.0002030434,0.0002135818,0.00002448525],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001136019,0.0001463754,0.0001967651,0.0001754229,0.0007697002,0.0004871943,0.00009047222,0.0003635223,0.000011645],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003794893,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001882773,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07186922,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02534581,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979587,0.0002414197,0.0005692485,0.0001598608,0.000678469,0.000392258],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982995,0.00009914395,0.0005072862,0.00008299677,0.0005223306,0.0004887714],"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":[0.0003665192,0.0006014451,0.009606715,0.0001986438,0.0007090145,0.0002929284,0.1261363,0.00011747,0.0003617784,0.664794,0.1753453,0.02146993],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008577782,0.0004856467,0.0002531464,0.0002666116,0.0001416629,0.00006042033,0.004965885,0.000005439654,0.0001665583,0.007613311,0.9849812,0.0002023134],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.5556248,0.1429533,0.0001211619,0.09806827,0.006964468,0.0003199945,0.00000770268,0.0000228009,0.1959175],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9065885,0.07898811,0.0005689966,0.002316125,0.001963583,0.0000021704,9.456529e-7,0.00001470237,0.00955689],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.809636,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9924391,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3110917822","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwaa022","title":"Conscience and Cakes: Reaffirming the Distinction Between Institutional Duties and Individual Rights","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Discrimination and Equality Law","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":"Conscience; Lesbian; Legislation; Law; Sociology; Scope (computer science); State (computer science); Political science; Gender studies","authors":[{"name":"Mariëtta van der Tol","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06871187651626011,"gpt":0.3140811990489273,"spread":0.2453693225326672,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005993349,0.00004834673,0.00009238974,0.00002023038,0.001026193,0.0001532154,0.00007091991,0.00004098767,0.000003754567],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007934972,0.00002961211,0.00001924962,0.00006545775,0.0009536662,0.0003184362,0.00002860768,0.0001035138,2.372327e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001016197,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00004859942,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004878619,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003917005,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9993137,0.00008312171,0.0001724107,0.00007489279,0.000269789,0.00008615958],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995643,0.0001086378,0.0001212196,0.00002169124,0.00006139551,0.0001227529],"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":[0.00001534826,0.000005538551,0.003266039,0.000009346329,0.00001047506,0.000003263259,0.01279875,0.000001086632,0.00001591803,0.9806732,0.0001703495,0.003030659],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006532719,0.0002609309,0.02121768,0.0001081382,0.0001107666,0.00004949471,0.003791192,0.00002261429,0.0001151572,0.09307611,0.8804352,0.0001594662],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.93743,0.0003771519,0.0003350356,0.01363597,0.0001497165,0.0000620171,0.000005105209,0.000007518569,0.04799753],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9983246,0.0007285886,0.00008818163,0.0005874778,0.000239875,3.433354e-7,8.79578e-7,0.000001258203,0.0000287719],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8875971,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7892752,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3208497582","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwab013","title":"Making Sense of a Complex Notion: Debates on State Religious Neutrality in Canada — A View from Quebec","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Université du Québec à Montréal","funders":"","keywords":"Neutrality; Indoctrination; Law; State (computer science); Multiculturalism; Sociology; Supreme court; Democracy; Political science; Establishment Clause; Ideology; Politics; First amendment","authors":[{"name":"Pierre Bosset","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03426809075966237,"gpt":0.3032502000815562,"spread":0.2689821093218938,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002041754,0.00007117745,0.0002419954,0.00002511921,0.0001236131,0.00002307817,0.00005619626,0.00003323741,0.00001291048],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004548454,0.00006083624,0.00005273601,0.0001039405,0.0002436265,0.00006865263,0.00001535732,0.000136581,2.140255e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000243861,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003390079,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9662787,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9811596,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989172,0.0001873757,0.000373489,0.00008521781,0.0002797851,0.0001569298],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991797,0.0002344532,0.0002512028,0.000062837,0.000179505,0.0000923562],"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":[0.0001155717,0.00005694627,0.005852386,0.0000420864,0.00005026338,0.0006252824,0.001826063,0.0004506974,0.0002378883,0.9876905,0.001152312,0.001899995],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005999976,0.00009159073,0.00886791,0.0006310895,0.00004112746,0.00009338761,0.001203496,0.00001999688,0.0003584998,0.0147267,0.9731813,0.0001848848],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9532077,0.001897979,0.00008974056,0.003958639,0.0002677425,0.00005217736,0.00003888017,0.000002951554,0.0404842],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9933512,0.004368921,0.0002023734,0.001915258,0.00009381749,2.660508e-7,0.000003388275,0.000003210133,0.00006159332],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9729638,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6013855,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2129410355","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rws005","title":"How Religious Arbitration Could Enhance Personal Autonomy","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Religious Freedom and Discrimination","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":"Office of the Chief Medical Examiner","funders":"","keywords":"Arbitration; Autonomy; Religious freedom; Political science; Compulsory arbitration; Law and economics; Law; State (computer science); Business; Sociology; Computer science; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Farrah Ahmed","is_ca":false},{"name":"Senwung Luk","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01715009676357333,"gpt":0.2908915983203651,"spread":0.2737415015567918,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007633776,0.0001029777,0.0001692131,0.00007415436,0.0003800934,0.0001656821,0.0000999541,0.0001422988,0.000004814592],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007242721,0.00008259741,0.0001020359,0.00008926367,0.0002225672,0.0008057925,0.00001269787,0.0001826242,0.0000022917],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001053118,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001614833,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008012029,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002432515,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988672,0.00009317246,0.0002507514,0.0000912228,0.000420805,0.0002768636],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991242,0.00006332352,0.0003212766,0.00005936361,0.000209107,0.0002227173],"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":[0.0001031571,0.0001306732,0.001909187,0.00003459799,0.00003782253,0.0000108551,0.0261738,0.000002039972,0.002472693,0.9466057,0.01443099,0.008088408],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005797619,0.0002678493,0.0003922976,0.0001030071,0.00009008557,0.0001078603,0.002145667,0.00002685191,0.002236269,0.03586715,0.9579432,0.0002399978],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3502753,0.02099273,0.005835715,0.01151677,0.002245764,0.0002768964,0.000002384711,0.0000438525,0.6088106],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9835111,0.01335064,0.0005525062,0.000681782,0.001167418,0.000001935215,0.000001726654,0.000008487462,0.0007244432],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9435122,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3368225,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2903789803","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwy048","title":"Trinity Western University v The Law Society of Upper Canada","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal 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":"Law; Charter; Statutory law; Supreme court; Political science; Appeal; Constitution; Common law; Public law; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Barry W. Bussey","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0201969302703281,"gpt":0.2676772516344703,"spread":0.2474803213641422,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003339834,0.00005105339,0.0001274054,0.00000332008,0.0008839398,0.00001693619,0.000136821,0.00004776467,0.000006961408],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000147646,0.00002891462,0.00008411371,0.00005810819,0.000777157,0.0001188912,0.00004065134,0.0001149796,2.26373e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001084837,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000121318,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.6341507,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7345196,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9993536,0.00008661675,0.0001328348,0.00004888741,0.0002603938,0.0001176363],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993815,0.00008779677,0.0001799845,0.00004119351,0.0002459577,0.00006359863],"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":[0.0004189822,0.0001462248,0.08736287,0.00008868226,0.000701191,0.00002784564,0.1086854,0.000007674627,0.0007318152,0.7046114,0.09481808,0.002399846],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002589847,0.00006946397,0.006591905,0.00002883059,0.00003277224,0.000003807663,0.005529775,9.734413e-7,0.0001893789,0.0004378183,0.9868068,0.00004955571],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9427555,0.0005018745,0.00001312133,0.01182193,0.0003160372,0.00006779718,0.000003825071,0.000003461475,0.04451647],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9947338,0.003723833,0.00007435174,0.0006430434,0.0002485585,4.40048e-8,1.243322e-7,0.000001756058,0.0005745159],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8919886,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.679864,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2765205482","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwx050","title":"Religious Freedom in the New World? Indigenous Sacred Sites and Religious Beliefs in the Courts in British Columbia","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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":"Indigenous; Supreme court; Law; Politics; Religious freedom; Political science; Indigenous rights; Diversity (politics); Sociology","authors":[{"name":"James Hickling","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01350349097571014,"gpt":0.2772826966525577,"spread":0.2637792056768476,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00141751,0.00009081971,0.0002580192,0.0000708166,0.0008783294,0.0008088694,0.0004845556,0.0001019445,0.000002912682],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001913151,0.0000795126,0.00005739892,0.0001329417,0.001055674,0.0002323006,0.00004264391,0.0004193567,4.786945e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006755726,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005847166,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3810976,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7984242,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984674,0.0002420039,0.0004195848,0.0001365107,0.0004023382,0.00033215],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989651,0.0003448171,0.0003427094,0.0001748056,0.00006411076,0.0001084459],"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":[0.0001171475,0.0002977033,0.5188476,0.00003853217,0.00003982808,0.002528757,0.0564039,0.00006065374,0.00002651191,0.3557102,0.06010039,0.005828663],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001532691,0.000255212,0.08343969,0.0004584174,0.00003180173,0.0007695926,0.0025857,0.000004132083,0.000001184147,0.06430848,0.8463725,0.0002405773],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9391631,0.009583183,0.000007641888,0.005317757,0.0001886186,0.0002590424,0.000006647668,0.000004125013,0.0454699],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9593867,0.03827244,0.0001120115,0.001590761,0.0003657395,0.000002502852,0.000001280602,0.000006002552,0.0002625357],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7862721,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7799947,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4408417310","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwaf003","title":"Protecting Conscientious Choices in National Legislation and EU Non-Discrimination Law: The Case Study of Ireland","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"European and International Law Studies","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":"Trinity College","funders":"Irish Research Council","keywords":"Legislation; Law; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Marta Lasek‐Markey","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02382928695213504,"gpt":0.3286982826784614,"spread":0.3048689957263263,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0012798,0.00004352677,0.00009026457,0.00008220269,0.0005077214,0.00006000303,0.00005559649,0.00002249545,7.830658e-7],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001352433,0.00002854127,0.00001984894,0.0001036103,0.0002013234,0.0002095493,0.00002600706,0.0001142432,5.56816e-8],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002764295,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000374963,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005391171,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02246244,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992497,0.0001468997,0.0002581508,0.00006684474,0.0002198293,0.00005858226],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99929,0.0001852414,0.0002111039,0.00002343719,0.0002741742,0.00001600711],"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":[0.00005729977,0.0001346682,0.009407145,0.00002692656,0.00005222716,0.0000589471,0.01980228,0.00004475519,0.0001820292,0.9688228,0.0001446211,0.00126631],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.01662676,0.003646915,0.1040571,0.002869756,0.0005000964,0.001536694,0.2025535,0.002264983,0.0009265792,0.1379585,0.5262092,0.0008498863],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8180122,0.0004032793,0.0000364987,0.0006858624,0.0001449126,0.0001661997,5.92185e-7,0.000001666229,0.1805488],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9990282,0.0005138518,0.00002795626,0.0001577228,0.00005907765,0.000001943527,1.836241e-7,0.000001722939,0.0002093573],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8308643,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9953751,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2165483064","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwv015","title":"<i>Trinity Western University v Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society</i>","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","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":"Law; Constitution; Political science; Charter; Nova scotia; Jurisdiction; Constitutional court; Conscience; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Barry W. Bussey","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04513203442762357,"gpt":0.2976174407610646,"spread":0.252485406333441,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005862893,0.00008161983,0.0001829932,0.00001465941,0.0003830601,0.00005582665,0.0001440247,0.00009473608,0.000004993666],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004407178,0.00006092447,0.0001270702,0.00008972832,0.0003707524,0.0003408373,0.00006128078,0.000181541,0.000004573534],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001557551,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008126591,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006584545,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004445374,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999136,0.0001058711,0.0001665868,0.00008400364,0.0003330661,0.0001745255],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991761,0.00005381688,0.0001959347,0.00004528162,0.0002906795,0.0002381176],"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":[0.001013564,0.0004644755,0.3543868,0.0001524835,0.0008871818,0.0003686611,0.3198134,0.00007194436,0.0009600225,0.1387514,0.1784019,0.004728117],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009400213,0.0001460819,0.003030748,0.00005673191,0.00005925421,0.00001842125,0.008765575,0.000001324281,0.00005524458,0.0006477936,0.9861522,0.0001266246],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9283946,0.00125703,0.0001334318,0.005879804,0.0007220347,0.00009640672,0.000002667866,0.00001721053,0.06349682],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9949565,0.003100188,0.000368101,0.0004759628,0.0003094568,2.987912e-8,4.06322e-7,0.000003832869,0.00078555],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8077503,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9953906,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4414378619","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwaf010","title":"On Prohibiting Pupil Prayers: Conceptions of Religion and Secularism in <i>Webber Academy</i> (Canada) and <i>Michaela School</i> (UK)","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Religious Education and Schools","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":"Prayer; Framing (construction); Secularism; Autonomy; Common ground; Chapel; Foundation (evidence); Expression (computer science)","authors":[{"name":"Ashleigh Keall","is_ca":false},{"name":"Howard Kislowicz","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.008984373665775662,"gpt":0.291984663660634,"spread":0.2830002899948584,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008088365,0.0001130535,0.0002618643,0.0001494617,0.0002894623,0.0000827955,0.00009570493,0.0001686714,0.000003754578],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002448137,0.00009647413,0.00004332385,0.000219531,0.0002410089,0.0001212103,0.00003102521,0.0004329022,1.947004e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008712088,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005436859,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02718828,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02643523,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986526,0.0001565401,0.0005048118,0.0001619445,0.000328276,0.0001957857],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990991,0.000196256,0.0003231078,0.00006694184,0.0001336862,0.0001809104],"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":[0.0001657002,0.00005025195,0.02462278,0.00008840822,0.00004704545,0.00001662602,0.002600768,0.00002606173,0.001700268,0.9073954,0.0614558,0.001830877],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.005300663,0.000600722,0.01305339,0.00451933,0.0002046663,0.0001667896,0.005149523,0.00005280868,0.00271328,0.4792281,0.4882716,0.000739092],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9239682,0.004490388,0.00006030604,0.008412865,0.0002342499,0.0002180167,0.000002006013,0.000005712707,0.06260827],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9650836,0.03087537,0.0002073852,0.00320714,0.00008761926,0.000003006844,7.707121e-7,0.000006156254,0.0005289603],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.4281673,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9913298,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2582707181","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rww080","title":"The Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society v Trinity Western University","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","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":"Law; Supreme court; Nova scotia; Ultra vires; Constitution; Political science; Charter; Statutory law; Human rights; Constitutional court; Constitutional law; Sociology; Doctrine","authors":[{"name":"Barry W. Bussey","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02660440883661307,"gpt":0.2836527271664773,"spread":0.2570483183298642,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005891389,0.00006575021,0.0001228535,0.000007052591,0.001038411,0.00005343336,0.0001647658,0.00006807548,0.000006504004],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005158142,0.00002984149,0.0001402971,0.00005346584,0.000608356,0.0002405105,0.00005158205,0.0001093988,0.000003365213],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001213069,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000406939,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002026702,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005513714,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992533,0.000116582,0.0001504554,0.00006877756,0.0002408006,0.0001700888],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992704,0.0002273444,0.0001889116,0.00004900999,0.0001626082,0.0001017452],"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":[0.001282692,0.0002530532,0.2907666,0.00008225718,0.001288558,0.0001316326,0.1106875,0.000003795324,0.004552989,0.4391459,0.09576894,0.05603614],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006286192,0.00007513149,0.01099279,0.00006570073,0.00003459592,0.000007395656,0.002807709,1.992253e-7,0.00007489921,0.0007854877,0.9844501,0.00007735053],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9487819,0.001148117,0.00018608,0.02579355,0.0007556005,0.0001070778,0.000002911705,0.00001302093,0.02321176],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.981544,0.01613387,0.00007272097,0.0001939802,0.0002300362,3.879408e-8,5.71893e-8,0.000002679139,0.001822607],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8886812,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7986726,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2887550384","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwy032","title":"The Religious and Ideological Freedom of Teachers in the English Legal Framework: Is the Balance Between Collective and Individual Rights Appropriate?","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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":"Dalhousie University","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Ideology; Statute; Political science; Context (archaeology); Sociology; Human rights; Citizenship; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Javier García Oliva","is_ca":true},{"name":"Diana Ginn","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01702522475128088,"gpt":0.2849785870961999,"spread":0.267953362344919,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001383403,0.00007998321,0.0001723888,0.0000227966,0.0009738046,0.0001046929,0.0002309822,0.000120219,0.000001428835],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002680834,0.00003437831,0.00004100964,0.0001286564,0.004419927,0.00009743894,0.00004500904,0.000375745,1.01098e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002247703,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002240134,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002508208,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0007148358,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988196,0.0003237885,0.0002595061,0.00009092077,0.0003205929,0.0001855725],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982451,0.001228637,0.0002320319,0.00007568262,0.0001539366,0.00006459961],"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":[0.00004620616,0.00001288895,0.01709907,0.000001797137,0.00003842198,0.000004039186,0.02167059,4.683626e-7,0.000001454458,0.9587508,0.00194969,0.0004246097],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004461904,0.0005041904,0.01365827,0.00007904595,0.00008445248,0.0000474842,0.004325317,0.000003217384,0.00002384125,0.220742,0.7599798,0.0001061771],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9250493,0.002845604,0.0001621805,0.005867243,0.000223666,0.0001765945,0.00001145966,0.000003884472,0.06566007],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9954531,0.002918575,0.0002008714,0.0006627219,0.0006990266,0.000001435119,2.77725e-7,0.000002257668,0.00006177257],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7580301,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9982895,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2343610063","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwv025","title":"Catholic Schools Can Be Catholic","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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":"Law; Appeal; Religious education; Charter; Establishment Clause; Political science; Protestantism; Parliament; Legislation; Jurisprudence; Free Exercise Clause; Freedom of religion; Sociology; Confessional; Supreme court; Human rights; First amendment; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Janet Epp Buckingham","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03652000659873157,"gpt":0.3165724312242084,"spread":0.2800524246254768,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005395411,0.00007136648,0.00015803,0.00004935464,0.0002925982,0.00006125789,0.0001186725,0.00006931498,0.000004218301],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001256221,0.00005628146,0.00005923708,0.00008524353,0.0005215526,0.0001574355,0.00001910467,0.0001857428,0.000001899986],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008936972,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001358308,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006709911,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008699304,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990829,0.00009643984,0.0002191942,0.00006610253,0.0003345404,0.0002008465],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.999056,0.00004512353,0.000170949,0.00006268072,0.0002632681,0.0004019804],"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":[0.00001153467,0.00001634199,0.0006594629,0.000002734105,0.000009653147,0.00003044904,0.003390324,0.000007221329,0.00003384679,0.9934976,0.001824581,0.0005162882],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002423167,0.0001035555,0.00007383266,0.00003294994,0.00002486758,0.0001536435,0.0006434738,5.861788e-7,0.00003503115,0.004806194,0.993806,0.00007752739],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4722051,0.002262343,0.00008470794,0.01330512,0.0005793668,0.00007179304,0.000009283729,0.00001291497,0.5114694],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9929286,0.002568864,0.0003762433,0.002595599,0.0006429102,6.528321e-7,9.76415e-7,0.000004757652,0.0008814213],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9919814,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999045,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2153328781","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwt036","title":"Religious Values and Two Same-Sex Marriage Cases Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial Processes","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":"Windsor; Supreme court; Law; Estate; State (computer science); Spouse; Political science; Legislation; Federal law; Constitutionality","authors":[{"name":"Lynn D. Wardle","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01381492651462013,"gpt":0.2771452689122565,"spread":0.2633303423976364,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007162424,0.00009410018,0.0002124719,0.0000351345,0.0005386602,0.0001436091,0.0002013537,0.00006546538,0.000008626602],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001709165,0.00004553512,0.00006402433,0.0001618963,0.0005334882,0.0002078393,0.00004487691,0.0001549562,4.840308e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002032103,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006651045,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08380626,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0017686,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987935,0.0002154468,0.0003677049,0.00008391205,0.000368173,0.0001712039],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987471,0.0003796998,0.0003939907,0.0000931016,0.0002887702,0.00009739677],"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":[0.0005122882,0.0003753857,0.06377982,0.0003967731,0.0006385319,0.00008677891,0.1055997,0.0001992304,0.01052949,0.1439911,0.663467,0.0104238],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001389944,0.0005359192,0.001173681,0.000550412,0.0001725097,0.0002771457,0.01118855,0.00007090686,0.003143301,0.1936118,0.7875921,0.0002938186],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9822854,0.005868402,0.00002343006,0.005646385,0.0002324246,0.000194418,0.000005056032,0.00000630712,0.005738168],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9797747,0.01885207,0.00002291487,0.0008077568,0.0001988126,0.000001739625,9.302424e-7,0.000007419989,0.0003336704],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.124125,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9222947,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2171410223","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwv021","title":"Space Enough for a Christian Law School","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","topic":"Legal Systems and Judicial Processes","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":"Space (punctuation); Law; Political science; Philosophy; Sociology; Linguistics","authors":[{"name":"Barry W. Bussey","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02864602629254484,"gpt":0.308484092758688,"spread":0.2798380664661432,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008495287,0.00006565181,0.0001817429,0.00002650654,0.0003488383,0.0001232052,0.0001051774,0.00009027141,0.000003706795],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001760311,0.00004827389,0.00006527672,0.00007105288,0.0001498985,0.0003265063,0.00001309027,0.0001046025,0.000002073137],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004827499,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002388919,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01463783,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002994248,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991987,0.00004793517,0.0002352705,0.00007444164,0.0002714677,0.0001722143],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990276,0.00005006597,0.000222416,0.00004446213,0.00034917,0.0003062901],"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":[0.0001055583,0.00002415852,0.0001153357,0.00002731882,0.0000171969,0.000009381978,0.003084665,0.000003467403,0.00007748289,0.9821919,0.01406023,0.0002833388],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00052031,0.0002790015,0.000007315788,0.00008962166,0.00002106766,0.00001992779,0.001052674,0.000001918575,0.0001467334,0.05240891,0.9453827,0.0000698487],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.07715929,0.01761286,0.002157736,0.02245336,0.002347299,0.0005096619,0.0000064697,0.00003618455,0.8777171],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9954771,0.001350804,0.0004441165,0.0006689767,0.001541284,0.000001819717,3.780378e-7,0.000007198659,0.0005083341],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9313225,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9919237,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}