{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":28,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":28,"direct_label_status":"direct model label, unvalidated","prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated (Codex and Gemma teacher distillation)","score_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline (scores rank; they never assert a category)","snapshot":{"source":"OpenAlex, pinned release, all 482 partitions","release":"2026-06-24","frame_built":"2026-07-12"},"query_hash":"d0a910580b15","filters":{"venue":"Ratio Juris"}},"results":[{"id":"W2800376573","doi":"10.1111/raju.12200","title":"Ownership, Use, and Exclusivity: The Kantian Approach","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":49,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Object (grammar); Reciprocal; Law and economics; Usability; Contrast (vision); Epistemology; Law; Philosophy; Sociology; Computer science; Political science; Artificial intelligence; Linguistics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1058675165811877,"gpt":0.3355693400562069,"spread":0.2297018234750192,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006710567,0.00005269392,0.0000622998,0.00001548262,0.0009986125,0.0001753895,0.0001278832,0.00009525778,0.00004810644],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005493537,0.0000343874,0.00002291197,0.0001279716,0.001251371,0.0002485376,0.00004073106,0.0001478472,0.00003583872],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001725828,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000902473,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001435126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001107679,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991608,0.0002161468,0.00007361317,0.0001249964,0.0002065603,0.0002179384],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994042,0.0002702556,0.00002241104,0.0001381619,0.00006605819,0.00009892388],"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":[0.000003075941,0.00001476816,0.0005958873,0.000003018426,0.000007283135,4.355246e-7,0.01503254,1.755847e-7,0.00001659124,0.9816782,0.002183458,0.0004645016],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001907541,0.00006895389,0.0126462,0.00001045207,0.0000428876,0.000002115994,0.003398561,0.0004187374,0.0003062736,0.4593321,0.5233278,0.0002551741],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1498272,0.0001177232,0.00311915,0.08294218,0.0004253924,0.0003376961,0.00001260028,0.0001232435,0.7630948],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9946287,0.00002342145,0.0002443716,0.002338416,0.001182896,0.000004248292,0.000001135997,0.000004286836,0.001572468],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8448015,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7680621,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2397389185","doi":"10.1111/raju.12122","title":"The Forces of Law: Duty, Coercion, and Power","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":40,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Coercion (linguistics); Stipulation; Jurisprudence; Law; Duty; Power (physics); Law and economics; Sociology; Political science; Philosophy; Physics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03305861707672286,"gpt":0.3289714597609529,"spread":0.29591284268423,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00041278,0.00002844012,0.00004581982,0.000005459239,0.0003868752,0.00002274059,0.00008053841,0.00005005979,0.00004431318],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002918011,0.00001449566,0.00001807994,0.00002632655,0.0008467459,0.0001071426,0.00001781345,0.0000348521,0.00001459329],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000009565678,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00004377562,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005599365,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008288965,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9995269,0.00007440824,0.00008119204,0.00005486199,0.0001423753,0.0001202411],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992266,0.0005694247,0.00002444514,0.00007290431,0.00005490596,0.00005168686],"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":[0.000003097857,0.000003870492,0.0001243579,0.000001059838,0.000003459176,1.265902e-7,0.00243163,1.286959e-8,0.0001189211,0.9961585,0.0006622865,0.0004926742],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007362821,0.00002218795,0.0007957289,0.000007867111,0.00000411968,1.041532e-7,0.0002315279,7.04454e-7,0.0009466654,0.7878177,0.2100643,0.00003541758],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1132099,0.0004045697,0.0002965222,0.1329303,0.0002750356,0.0001394682,0.0000169203,0.00003410414,0.7526931],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978551,0.0001586109,0.000016536,0.0003923497,0.0001025313,0.000002035096,9.805734e-8,0.000001874324,0.001470841],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8846452,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3119871,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1933138509","doi":"10.1111/raju.12088","title":"Paying a Price, Facing a Fine, Counting the Cost: The Differences that Make the Difference","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Economic Theory and Institutions","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":31,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Calgary","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Section (typography); Set (abstract data type); Function (biology); Mathematical economics; Economics; Microeconomics; Computer science; Business; Advertising","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08582151452728418,"gpt":0.2320309329924938,"spread":0.1462094184652096,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001272494,0.00015746,0.0002235241,0.00004682796,0.0009583215,0.0004002615,0.0006082122,0.00005801582,0.0001250244],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003060331,0.00008415832,0.00009177091,0.0001849497,0.0002439985,0.0002062061,0.0001156649,0.0002803575,0.0003454042],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007663589,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005664366,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003480712,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004688224,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989459,0.00005888201,0.0004023684,0.0002659329,0.00004164694,0.0002852837],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986735,0.0003906337,0.0003404564,0.0005142494,0.00002966632,0.00005150303],"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":[0.0000102945,0.00002885781,0.09944237,0.000006869926,0.00006394596,9.418702e-7,0.006967889,0.0001966165,0.00001306117,0.8886851,0.001470887,0.003113127],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001104336,0.00008989895,0.3311722,0.00005694089,0.00005436813,0.0000385876,0.007806872,0.03012997,0.0003950254,0.2638939,0.3644173,0.0008406194],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8991516,0.00168141,0.02412038,0.007851272,0.0009667453,0.0006169547,0.00009365377,0.00005864505,0.06545933],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961539,0.00009739633,0.0000570402,0.001016386,0.0002086938,0.000120147,0.00000536104,0.00001096203,0.002330132],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6247912,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7370731,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1761959659","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2012.00514.x","title":"Presumptions in Legal Argumentation","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Artificial Intelligence in Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Computer science; Epistemology; Work (physics); Event (particle physics); Management science; Philosophy; Engineering; Physics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05998884018687108,"gpt":0.4055579889840732,"spread":0.3455691487972022,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004585562,0.00003922901,0.00004611209,0.00004542814,0.0002247174,0.00005375782,0.00007971196,0.00004658273,0.001080511],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001268665,0.00004266396,0.00002052932,0.0001791241,0.00009997621,0.0008385941,0.00000989061,0.00006132283,0.0005751319],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001057758,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005613704,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004223729,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01168051,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992754,0.000111328,0.0001410364,0.00007171116,0.0001751003,0.0002254426],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997353,0.00006854776,0.00003352576,0.00007275413,0.00002612946,0.00006376436],"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":[0.000006204231,0.0001411635,0.0615646,0.000002064159,0.000005394355,8.818965e-7,0.04758311,0.0001088606,0.001098192,0.8739798,0.003546402,0.01196332],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001370892,0.00003285,0.09498849,0.00001850256,0.00002072443,7.799304e-7,0.01656432,0.0005094348,0.0183447,0.01081945,0.858181,0.0003826453],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8277838,0.0001148416,0.003575885,0.002609355,0.0009005578,0.0003357862,0.000004368738,0.00008261365,0.1645928],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961464,0.00002553757,0.0004672649,0.0001127292,0.0004481994,0.0000259501,0.000002676888,0.0000040231,0.002767193],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8631604,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998326,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1515411761","doi":"10.1111/raju.12070","title":"Beyond the Law‐State: The Adequacy of <scp>R</scp>az's Account of Legal Systems in Explaining Intra‐State and Supra‐State Legality","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":13,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"McMaster University","funders":"","keywords":"Principle of legality; State (computer science); Citation; Law; Sociology; Library science; Political science; Computer science; Algorithm","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03164222571396745,"gpt":0.2880223225213779,"spread":0.2563800968074105,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0022043,0.0001224242,0.0002726596,0.00003816256,0.0004923302,0.0001269982,0.0002546618,0.00004186289,0.000003453053],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000531921,0.00007685742,0.00004508905,0.0003417354,0.001391309,0.0004225707,0.00009489972,0.0001660722,0.000006034933],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000791343,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004323169,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.09832277,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03940611,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981732,0.0003765765,0.0004417049,0.0001752603,0.0005524129,0.0002808583],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986226,0.0006631791,0.0002401839,0.0001474147,0.0002582895,0.00006836056],"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":[0.00004386717,0.00008339128,0.01210843,0.00003330861,0.0001011978,0.00001035792,0.1603812,0.0009241891,0.0002716227,0.819919,0.004698269,0.001425198],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002327657,0.0003776734,0.03547261,0.000265913,0.0001455216,0.00001349994,0.3273509,0.0008128933,0.003548689,0.1861914,0.4430251,0.0004680914],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9311088,0.002930522,0.0001302594,0.002110868,0.0004087749,0.0004505699,0.00006215606,0.00001714981,0.06278087],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9988713,0.0003295414,0.00001578835,0.0001511763,0.0001289955,0.00003322574,0.0000022092,0.000005249459,0.0004625243],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6337276,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9781222,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1920893504","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2010.00452.x","title":"Dichotomies and Oppositions in Legal Argumentation","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":12,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Dichotomy; Argument (complex analysis); Epistemology; Function (biology); Sociology; Computer science; Philosophy","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.006254954551877653,"gpt":0.2411551073782732,"spread":0.2349001528263955,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0001209514,0.00004665854,0.00005224091,0.00007423471,0.00007168607,0.000152257,0.00008535213,0.00003086366,0.00001545731],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00001094523,0.0000446572,0.00001115831,0.0001016581,0.00001147141,0.0006579048,0.00002362207,0.0000681128,0.00001977666],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001060986,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00001882356,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002099556,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0006685228,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999555,0.00002484513,0.0001229383,0.0001365702,0.00008674617,0.00007393388],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997549,0.00002499249,0.00003914663,0.0001319945,0.00001812689,0.00003080451],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000007733837,0.0001936661,0.05634039,0.00003511202,0.00002122331,0.00001806057,0.008207595,0.00008797433,0.463392,0.4459601,0.003293753,0.02244245],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001245692,0.00006871408,0.7767594,0.00002544831,0.000007694615,0.00003173723,0.00009356788,0.1585988,0.04871818,0.002152754,0.01197936,0.0003185938],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.895523,0.0000196303,0.1020078,0.00106585,0.0003391712,0.0001633887,0.000001819351,0.00004088651,0.0008383872],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9895672,0.000006587191,0.01000526,0.00009371349,0.0000529531,0.0000237229,0.000004848363,0.000002302365,0.0002434255],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.720419,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1821068,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2072611680","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2007.00381.x","title":"The Regular Practice of Morality in Law","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Positivism; Morality; Epistemology; Law; Legal positivism; Philosophy; Philosophy of law; Law and economics; Sociology; Political science; Comparative law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02336370591314746,"gpt":0.3174846268317675,"spread":0.2941209209186201,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006920071,0.00002905881,0.00005370168,8.951934e-7,0.0006061756,0.00001662069,0.0001227645,0.00006164183,0.00002713624],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002560564,0.0000200453,0.00003540518,0.0001576152,0.0006120341,0.000214672,0.00001139912,0.00008042065,0.000008517404],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002960198,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007465945,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002879357,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003063652,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992839,0.0002223366,0.0001054657,0.00006294039,0.0002259561,0.00009940076],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995558,0.0001699108,0.00006191218,0.000110865,0.00008094899,0.00002055343],"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":[0.000006733723,0.00003712446,0.0004736919,0.000001736015,0.000007803452,0.000002684586,0.04990427,0.000007041874,0.00009096681,0.9338582,0.0154811,0.0001286398],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007783972,0.000007124536,0.0009575704,0.000002545949,0.000004297002,6.82422e-7,0.009717735,0.000003954891,0.0004282243,0.004626908,0.9841374,0.00003576273],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1830278,0.001774575,0.00004600201,0.05574841,0.0003119213,0.0003603744,0.000005212001,0.00005013998,0.7586755],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9937347,0.001003739,0.0003316242,0.0005159986,0.0001057933,0.000006149393,7.928887e-7,0.000001899694,0.004299281],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9686562,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4662274,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1580343503","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2011.00484.x","title":"When Is a Country Multinational? Problems with Statistical and Subjective Approaches*","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Systems and Governance","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":"Multinational corporation; Allegiance; State (computer science); Sovereignty; German; Dilemma; Political science; Plural; Sociology; Political economy; Law and economics; Law; Positive economics; Epistemology; Economics; Politics; History; Philosophy","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04508772287482416,"gpt":0.2586104444013328,"spread":0.2135227215265086,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002269759,0.00006492684,0.00009374056,0.00001182272,0.0001938195,0.00004438815,0.00006101082,0.00005207248,0.0001984385],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00008904275,0.00005031904,0.00000883023,0.00006153864,0.0002624999,0.0001677233,0.00001267252,0.00006271234,0.00001796161],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005620276,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001300218,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02937763,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006849264,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992093,0.0000672274,0.0001015922,0.0001688154,0.0002574279,0.0001956512],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996281,0.0000886957,0.0000517182,0.00006388027,0.00006053001,0.0001070625],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001223981,0.00005123091,0.01876425,0.00001448773,0.00001885196,0.000002370748,0.04157991,1.679811e-7,0.00000314327,0.9373522,0.001456346,0.0007448249],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001326186,0.0003158333,0.557921,0.00008481125,0.00006502142,0.000008648436,0.004294711,0.001321489,0.0002367409,0.1377818,0.2960031,0.0006406582],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2797368,0.000446608,0.07003561,0.003685511,0.0002057248,0.001971376,0.0006132907,0.0001688016,0.6431363],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9938359,0.00000773694,0.003193351,0.0001881823,0.00009683478,0.00004752112,0.000003485574,0.000006160491,0.002620805],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7995704,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9770858,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2274220625","doi":"10.1111/raju.12115","title":"An Argumentation Interface for Expert Opinion Evidence","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":9,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"National Natural Science Foundation of China","keywords":"Argumentation theory; Credibility; Argument (complex analysis); Set (abstract data type); Matching (statistics); Computer science; Rigour; Reliability (semiconductor); Epistemology; Work (physics); Expert opinion; Boundary-work; Public opinion; Management science; Engineering ethics; Political science; Law; Philosophy; Engineering; Mathematics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06657413016424077,"gpt":0.3698759947568834,"spread":0.3033018645926426,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002450748,0.00007520815,0.00007311292,0.00004423118,0.00008554076,0.0001107322,0.0002843641,0.00003524351,0.00002105253],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004996763,0.00005267085,0.00003128921,0.00006768516,0.000008350415,0.001786188,0.00002495193,0.00001488253,0.00006123879],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006210407,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000284777,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00003966192,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00001175997,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992158,0.00006203853,0.0001867635,0.0002693121,0.0001454125,0.0001206522],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993306,0.0001189322,0.00009948348,0.0003247538,0.00007618093,0.00005005567],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003360974,0.0001010649,0.001148452,0.00003134374,0.00001952774,4.218194e-7,0.005913842,0.00008941227,0.7539098,0.01497201,0.01710239,0.2066782],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001488962,0.0007399729,0.01016424,0.0004668445,0.000004477,0.000005709127,0.000115837,0.2032775,0.7351336,0.001158089,0.04693578,0.000508955],"study_design_candidate":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_consensus":"bench_or_experimental","genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01509553,0.000232715,0.9814939,0.001907994,0.0008226243,0.0003311406,0.000002162475,0.00008949701,0.00002438616],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9769556,0.0001037044,0.02219972,0.0001388413,0.0002345592,0.0000985057,0.000002685399,0.000006247608,0.0002601431],"genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9618601,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2147855,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1963569351","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00177","title":"Legal Obligation and Aesthetic Ideals: A Renewed Legal Positivist Theory of Law's Normativity","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","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 New Brunswick","funders":"","keywords":"Obligation; Law; Positivism; Order (exchange); Legal positivism; Philosophy of law; Legal realism; Legal norm; Sociology; Philosophy; Political science; Legal profession; Epistemology; Comparative law","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01342387843461227,"gpt":0.2787319773754142,"spread":0.2653080989408019,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007607731,0.00007741825,0.0001275244,0.000006182785,0.0005161396,0.0001147306,0.00009261762,0.0001007341,0.00006488663],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004725459,0.00006825168,0.00005809083,0.0001652081,0.0004503438,0.0005707773,0.00001848784,0.00009466004,0.000007743095],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003893811,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008208491,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002898199,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003571881,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989749,0.0003278395,0.0001599265,0.0001253603,0.0002572504,0.0001547492],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995692,0.00007033978,0.0001011621,0.000103099,0.00009437306,0.00006186234],"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":[0.00002010499,0.00004396169,0.0003402743,0.000007762358,0.00001170933,0.000003362389,0.02458105,0.000004889051,0.0009484945,0.9696988,0.001247153,0.003092433],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001281666,0.0002405563,0.01156384,0.0001178992,0.0001390673,0.00005061046,0.01987327,0.0001730074,0.005662675,0.1506011,0.80964,0.0006563267],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7507876,0.0003498547,0.0007726114,0.003927816,0.0001114111,0.0002209769,0.00001121796,0.00006494438,0.2437536],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.995741,0.0002114052,0.0001942244,0.0003556137,0.0001103868,0.0000087383,0.000007081941,0.000005000076,0.003366547],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8190978,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.438123,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4410865059","doi":"10.1111/raju.12426","title":"Reflections on Complexity, Evidence, and Law","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"International Political Science Association","funders":"","keywords":"Philosophy; Law; Political science; Epistemology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1190413797807385,"gpt":0.4361583511226534,"spread":0.317116971341915,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0001872029,0.00003870002,0.0000538889,0.000004079822,0.001161415,0.0000971782,0.00007251534,0.00006758262,0.0001276437],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006331811,0.00003413552,0.00002852918,0.0002140846,0.0003373578,0.000131868,0.00001775047,0.00008577396,0.00002467934],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004206341,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005891644,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00115835,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01182393,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9995448,0.00007877634,0.00006009369,0.0001051481,0.0001174033,0.00009377357],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997402,0.00009623086,0.00001589523,0.00007396241,0.00004282435,0.0000309287],"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":[0.000002042567,0.00001484214,0.0001028391,0.000003266985,0.000007837976,1.946392e-7,0.006517719,0.000001023498,0.00007829376,0.952289,0.04080093,0.000182035],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006128574,0.00001769031,0.001269953,0.00003728773,0.00001232082,1.108197e-7,0.002762768,0.000004938714,0.0001454615,0.1070358,0.8885983,0.00005404655],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.006993711,0.0003995113,0.00009561203,0.0237694,0.0002691259,0.0001262384,0.000002786506,0.0000758194,0.9682678],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9603553,0.0005669878,0.0004145181,0.004264425,0.0001864743,0.00001368745,0.00000138982,0.000002002398,0.03419518],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9533616,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8932784,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2998571529","doi":"10.1111/raju.12256","title":"Soldiers as Public Officials: A Moral Justification for Combatant Immunity","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"War, Ethics, and Justification","field":"Arts and Humanities","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Doctrine; Combatant; Law; Harm; Convention; Just war theory; Political science; State (computer science); Sociology; Spanish Civil War","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.122758158883132,"gpt":0.2918407491302055,"spread":0.1690825902470735,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005961654,0.0001359723,0.0001849363,0.0001062626,0.0005945732,0.0003756747,0.0002101017,0.00009414986,0.001295154],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002141548,0.0001304151,0.00009082114,0.00004557976,0.0001666342,0.0004591038,0.00002274264,0.0001724823,0.0007940007],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006134328,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001795446,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005355689,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001076129,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989154,0.0000782317,0.0003354407,0.0002401561,0.0001942697,0.000236511],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987316,0.0001782953,0.0001866473,0.000424028,0.0004186919,0.00006072219],"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":[0.00004170013,0.000119526,0.0001104074,0.00008799642,0.00003825286,1.558815e-7,0.02572133,0.00001465722,0.001305474,0.9570359,0.01266395,0.00286066],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0009062052,0.0002637156,0.00107818,0.0000344672,0.0001218016,0.000001468527,0.02169042,0.005275953,0.002488375,0.02242457,0.9452088,0.0005060146],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8449122,0.0004412883,0.003292243,0.01269753,0.004700066,0.002657837,0.0003704915,0.0004781986,0.1304501],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9798706,0.00002550302,0.0001560482,0.0003951687,0.0006178601,0.00009096781,0.000465341,0.00002542339,0.01835315],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9346113,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999984,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2742639438","doi":"10.1111/raju.12166","title":"When Trumps Clash: Dworkin and the Doctrine of Proportionality","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Doctrine; Proportionality (law); Law and economics; Law; Political science; Philosophy; Sociology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07090649790703209,"gpt":0.3657432294537599,"spread":0.2948367315467278,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00122098,0.00003751004,0.00009392506,0.000007664516,0.000847976,0.00007146975,0.0001859711,0.00006301796,0.00006988156],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009885232,0.00002447305,0.00003526145,0.00001768058,0.001820628,0.0001323621,0.00004131478,0.0001070703,0.000007148788],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001242624,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001116738,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002799103,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001079886,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9993058,0.0001400782,0.000132317,0.00008017928,0.0002273249,0.0001142952],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993779,0.0002000212,0.0001046278,0.0002022512,0.00006140001,0.00005380954],"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":[0.00002021119,0.00001167432,0.001568354,0.000006689929,0.00000782286,3.205503e-7,0.00267324,2.937891e-7,0.000004256461,0.9946956,0.0004914432,0.0005201172],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003364093,0.000009741577,0.01919278,0.000008058563,0.00001451119,1.931009e-7,0.00008880363,0.00003140233,0.0001383972,0.9358728,0.04426304,0.00004387153],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1539103,0.0001813807,0.0001834559,0.3205724,0.0002670074,0.0003941659,0.00001880901,0.00002634048,0.5244461],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978648,0.00010334,0.0001035894,0.0003275867,0.0003627234,0.000006317076,8.839668e-7,0.000001694737,0.001229038],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8439546,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.670818,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3009134116","doi":"10.1111/raju.12288","title":"The Nature of Law and Potential Coercion","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Free Will and Agency","field":"Neuroscience","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"McMaster University","funders":"","keywords":"Coercion (linguistics); Morality; Appeal; Law; Enforcement; Political science; Compliance (psychology); Law enforcement; Law and economics; Sociology; Psychology; Philosophy; Social psychology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0139100925645415,"gpt":0.2343247408479653,"spread":0.2204146482834238,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00002595917,0.00003337215,0.00003932055,0.000003328609,0.0001182487,0.0000225125,0.00007800595,0.00003054524,0.00001525263],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007566837,0.00002076036,0.00001612412,0.00005054275,0.00007856666,0.00005847022,0.00002815232,0.00008934494,0.000008992242],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000001254565,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000006876228,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.000006415441,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000004572588,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9996663,0.00002646539,0.00006379422,0.00009485184,0.00009270482,0.00005591586],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9998404,0.00003577669,0.00002515027,0.00006282022,0.000009307987,0.00002650203],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_gemma":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002032661,0.000009890648,0.00003521769,0.000009551194,0.000001659345,0.000007617485,0.0003945402,0.000009866955,0.8815567,0.1124277,0.003784535,0.001742411],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002161032,0.00009459217,0.001039914,0.000004332727,0.000008469669,0.000005564494,0.00002619673,0.002601442,0.9051731,0.001960469,0.08879436,0.00007542106],"study_design_candidate":"bench_or_experimental","study_design_consensus":"bench_or_experimental","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9525807,0.0007327595,0.0004434795,0.02494757,0.0004635197,0.0002189541,0.00002836297,0.00005731186,0.02052734],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9975202,0.00008416094,0.00002287949,0.002149884,0.00008089471,0.000001171018,4.111413e-7,0.000002786408,0.0001376118],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1104672,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09094851,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2154286082","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00147","title":"Scarcity, Discourses of Implementation, and Habermasian Law and Democracy","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"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":"Scarcity; Discourse ethics; Democracy; Perspective (graphical); Sociology; Epistemology; Work (physics); Mode (computer interface); Law and economics; Law; Political science; Economics; Computer science; Philosophy; Artificial intelligence","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02881720967533737,"gpt":0.3725118150548618,"spread":0.3436946053795245,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0001948262,0.00004069598,0.00006997618,0.000012229,0.0003664788,0.00003908752,0.00004232827,0.00003961805,0.0003215847],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002087518,0.00003872435,0.00001331335,0.00005107108,0.0005900496,0.0002292925,0.00001138564,0.00005045228,0.000004003723],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000008315258,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00004978654,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004079288,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004493529,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9994729,0.00007425138,0.0001071369,0.00008339732,0.0001347319,0.0001276457],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997275,0.00008775629,0.00002094624,0.00005065758,0.0000260009,0.00008709181],"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":[0.000002653068,0.00001159969,0.00377993,0.000007332626,0.000006892953,4.500143e-7,0.006472542,2.276402e-7,0.00002494053,0.9849636,0.0002241947,0.004505649],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002936496,0.00004707146,0.03231079,0.000011616,0.00004036743,0.000001101141,0.002572376,0.0000108955,0.0009257609,0.9358615,0.02780041,0.0001244253],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6821913,0.0001788213,0.00002893148,0.04279464,0.00003874079,0.0001468172,0.00003400051,0.0000225332,0.2745642],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9986224,0.0001091137,0.0001272574,0.0006684039,0.0001108008,0.000002024886,0.000003109784,0.000002631513,0.0003542361],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3164311,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6166691,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2118717622","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00191","title":"Deliberative Democracy and Liberal Rights","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Université de Montréal","funders":"","keywords":"Deliberation; Deliberative democracy; Argument (complex analysis); Legitimacy; Democracy; Democratic legitimacy; Law and economics; Political science; Liberal democracy; Law; Economic Justice; Liberalism; Democratic theory; Sociology; Politics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03560618984125243,"gpt":0.3331400076000716,"spread":0.2975338177588192,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000215861,0.00006144109,0.00007937798,0.00002258926,0.0009477824,0.00008026314,0.0000704769,0.00009686754,0.0001885766],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001207187,0.00005407834,0.00002418206,0.0001064704,0.0003106743,0.0003083364,0.00001682541,0.0001415592,0.00008444564],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002963978,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007705189,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0009373233,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001181957,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999242,0.0001308871,0.0001005271,0.0001262579,0.0001741016,0.0002261945],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994909,0.000197139,0.00002073841,0.00007025902,0.00005858126,0.0001623454],"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":[0.000006415937,0.00001917343,0.0004129652,0.000001227334,0.000007572573,0.00000948897,0.008018161,8.080088e-7,0.0000205069,0.9884349,0.002350404,0.0007184073],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001106885,0.00002090742,0.001345018,0.000004310757,0.000008040065,0.000001627779,0.0001094629,0.00005143709,0.0001190997,0.8978479,0.1002909,0.00009061464],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.31686,0.0001328285,0.0005540943,0.05067251,0.0001912339,0.0001474182,0.000005029483,0.00009675891,0.6313401],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9911163,0.00008381934,0.0003717511,0.001520338,0.0006040654,0.000003897998,0.000001909888,0.000003699371,0.006294158],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6742563,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7289672,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2161815389","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2008.00405.x","title":"Locke on Toleration and Inclusion","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","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":"University of Regina","funders":"","keywords":"Toleration; Articulation (sociology); Polity; Liberalism; Argument (complex analysis); Democracy; Deliberation; Sociology; Deliberative democracy; Law; Epistemology; Political science; Law and economics; Philosophy; Politics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02213036907435186,"gpt":0.2932377962783683,"spread":0.2711074272040164,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00008448611,0.00003253568,0.0000418793,0.0000169788,0.002362372,0.00001043849,0.00003526795,0.00002913042,0.00006931228],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005365328,0.0000308516,0.00001068983,0.00005306998,0.0002966347,0.00007695438,0.00006470529,0.00003477986,0.00002455981],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003689146,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003358427,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008267977,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002808167,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9995752,0.00004337872,0.00005675609,0.00006725221,0.0001766378,0.00008077683],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997974,0.00005656475,0.00001996436,0.0000402701,0.00003365857,0.0000521512],"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":[0.000002578217,0.00001252782,0.0008541234,5.719108e-7,0.000001691314,0.000002999516,0.004839051,0.000006512788,0.00007221167,0.9906146,0.002912617,0.0006804968],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000868284,0.00004134674,0.002109737,0.000004132509,0.000003176911,0.000002635993,0.0001702831,0.00003580697,0.0003407549,0.001350115,0.9957814,0.00007377631],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4547654,0.0001030122,0.001183273,0.004988597,0.0001404367,0.00009496592,0.00000520069,0.00004208227,0.538677],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9935977,0.00008485511,0.0001904113,0.001127164,0.0002395824,0.000002339963,0.000004220275,0.000001655253,0.004752012],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9928688,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989364,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4212915363","doi":"10.1111/raju.12334","title":"Bentham’s Public Utilitarianism and Its Jurisprudential Significance","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","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":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Utilitarianism; Morality; Jurisprudence; Jeremy bentham; Law; Philosophy of law; Legislator; Normative; Philosophy; Interpretation (philosophy); Sociology; Law and economics; Political science; Public law; Legislation","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03822280387896085,"gpt":0.3193784715863606,"spread":0.2811556677073997,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002418272,0.00006323849,0.00008322206,0.00001970782,0.0006928053,0.0002466851,0.0001274364,0.00006523862,0.0004483073],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001202167,0.00006867683,0.00003601266,0.0002227395,0.0000773849,0.000285732,0.00006650489,0.00008675011,0.0001008728],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003734914,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003496191,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003970637,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004596548,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990873,0.00008880159,0.0001345421,0.0002327235,0.0002241443,0.0002325229],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995209,0.00005497146,0.0000404337,0.0001429305,0.0001288692,0.0001119269],"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":[0.000001079418,0.00003508676,0.0003604702,0.000005061853,0.00001073471,0.000004357929,0.002208419,5.408624e-7,0.004426968,0.9891846,0.001846204,0.001916483],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001482554,0.000007835673,0.003752968,0.000003558237,0.00001420247,0.000001127895,0.0009396925,0.0001444879,0.006532099,0.003402917,0.9849204,0.0001324472],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.624385,0.002603199,0.003549119,0.07657706,0.0007245364,0.0007818909,0.0001315102,0.0002770781,0.2909707],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9950623,0.0003319341,0.0002911714,0.0003077968,0.0003289197,0.00003637901,0.00001012456,0.000006390843,0.003624965],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9857817,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5328568,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1497418157","doi":"10.1111/raju.12068","title":"Political Equality by Precedent","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Philosophy and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Entitlement (fair division); Constructive; Politics; Law and economics; Begging; Sociology; Inequality; Property (philosophy); Law; Political science; Economics; Epistemology; Mathematical economics; Philosophy; Mathematics; Computer science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.14551455825995,"gpt":0.4144367432656803,"spread":0.2689221850057303,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009510209,0.00005836953,0.00008847794,0.00001281387,0.000204155,0.00006490851,0.0001442626,0.0001334176,0.00009958665],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001130636,0.00005594259,0.00003644645,0.00008490639,0.0003525274,0.0001589543,0.00002838338,0.0001553862,0.0002859229],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001735053,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003524424,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00317054,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002740827,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985696,0.0003066805,0.0001399261,0.0001293636,0.0004428516,0.0004115834],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989758,0.0001751352,0.00002022018,0.0001226529,0.0001014928,0.0006046788],"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":[0.000003724461,0.00004115169,0.0002211652,0.000002047561,0.000003991784,5.290868e-7,0.00255807,1.890593e-7,0.00001296841,0.9749287,0.02215282,0.00007458423],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001298456,0.00003188425,0.0001279255,0.000002743918,0.000007811506,2.097618e-7,0.001084107,0.00001630126,0.0004852658,0.7078416,0.2901712,0.0001010898],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01231331,0.00006812936,0.001124351,0.05881525,0.0003323227,0.0001052123,0.00002902072,0.0000983858,0.927114],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9938142,0.000002979597,0.00009588157,0.002290519,0.0006536759,0.000006551066,0.000006829297,0.000004465235,0.003124902],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9815009,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.479293,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2018743301","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2007.00355.x","title":"Rhetoric, Harm, and the Personification of Progress in Mill's <i>On Liberty</i>","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Political Theory and Influence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Laurentian University","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Rhetoric; Mill; Law; Harm principle; Harm; Political science; Rhetorical question; Scrutiny; Sociology; Philosophy; History; Literature; Art","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01627014826883257,"gpt":0.3215788633194586,"spread":0.305308715050626,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001471749,0.00003668183,0.00006889737,0.00002504788,0.0001281998,0.00001999835,0.00008927456,0.00004008032,0.00001855456],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002082887,0.00002493401,0.00001816664,0.0001505514,0.0005955621,0.0001033917,0.000007673982,0.00006176613,0.000007099989],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000228058,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003043279,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001385126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00009199893,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9993665,0.0001430273,0.0001258186,0.00008071958,0.0001413826,0.0001425649],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994531,0.0003538103,0.00004204499,0.0000787496,0.00003148328,0.00004078171],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00008605549,0.0000283329,0.002383572,0.00000410315,0.000002464337,5.529218e-7,0.01507949,4.009337e-7,0.00009948557,0.9752978,0.00007342444,0.006944319],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00571627,0.0005435997,0.354174,0.0002444586,0.00007203974,0.000003746534,0.02511655,0.0004460283,0.04442607,0.2880747,0.2803054,0.0008771289],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9003277,0.0005245389,0.0001581725,0.0040602,0.0001033502,0.0002917171,0.000002342186,0.00001830639,0.09451368],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9991278,0.0000778428,0.00008021163,0.0002693539,0.00007969527,0.000008285087,3.522136e-7,0.000002024792,0.0003544433],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6872231,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2194373,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2398482181","doi":"10.1111/raju.12130","title":"The Ambiguity of Force","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"War, Ethics, and Justification","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":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Argument (complex analysis); Ambiguity; Positivism; Closeness; Order (exchange); Epistemology; Empiricism; Legal positivism; Philosophy; Sociology; Law; Political science; Legal realism; Mathematics; Legal research; Linguistics; Medicine; Economics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05128283336193885,"gpt":0.2523430092640382,"spread":0.2010601759020994,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002083661,0.00003809922,0.00004911294,0.0000117674,0.0002867992,0.00004252625,0.00008839795,0.00002097216,0.000316463],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007887073,0.00001883085,0.00003128435,0.000008183737,0.0002358076,0.00009736138,0.00001029828,0.00003301383,0.00009494924],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000009161494,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00002347625,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0001007718,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001183502,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999612,0.00002456837,0.0001315981,0.00006408297,0.00009424051,0.00007349856],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994775,0.0001498079,0.00006802815,0.0001756533,0.0001150139,0.00001400442],"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":[0.000008240138,0.00001234264,0.00005489683,0.000008418209,0.00001100771,7.432297e-8,0.01149064,2.477861e-7,0.00235781,0.9592973,0.01633828,0.01042075],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002175833,0.00004688589,0.001483368,0.00002264645,0.00002150568,2.557315e-7,0.001746622,0.00002740716,0.02064367,0.05761345,0.9180759,0.000100739],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3790555,0.0008285849,0.004017517,0.03734433,0.00297903,0.0005570468,0.0001407682,0.0001940601,0.5748832],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9101198,0.00005434296,0.00001115582,0.00005862184,0.0003512339,0.000006681989,0.000001770989,0.000004279003,0.08939209],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9017376,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3465048,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121890113","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00208","title":"Judicial Hegemony: Dworkin’s <i>Freedom’s Law</i> and the Spectrum of Constitutional Democracies","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","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":"Laurentian University","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Supreme court; Democracy; Political science; Constitutional law; Judicial review; Law and economics; Sociology; Politics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02104602275551616,"gpt":0.2454582728427759,"spread":0.2244122500872597,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003585916,0.0000875136,0.0001897,0.00002482312,0.001490901,0.00004683491,0.000132178,0.00005200191,0.0002437851],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001415415,0.00006335659,0.00006939477,0.0001800785,0.01080342,0.000133289,0.00005177866,0.00008784373,0.00003882275],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003140213,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008698161,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006538534,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.009934147,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989831,0.0001128436,0.000203544,0.0001354496,0.0003714622,0.0001935639],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994537,0.0002598818,0.00008625186,0.00007812266,0.00007377815,0.00004825194],"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":[0.00002114656,0.00002492266,0.001160545,0.00000175135,0.00003779842,0.000001741001,0.001972767,0.000009815858,0.00001025259,0.9911709,0.005323057,0.0002653181],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00156087,0.00004563383,0.002757285,0.00004159406,0.0001190712,0.000008713454,0.001869856,0.0001621459,0.0001621199,0.3789606,0.6140307,0.0002814518],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.009377309,0.006306028,0.0007327052,0.04667299,0.000694787,0.0003883492,0.00003288381,0.00006043764,0.9357345],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9961158,0.001790124,0.00008072836,0.000971087,0.0006900541,0.0000161087,0.000001207672,0.000002181701,0.0003327093],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9867385,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999809,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1598197424","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2012.00520.x","title":"Dworkin and Phenomenology of the “Pre‐Legal”?","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","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":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Phenomenology (philosophy); Philosophy; Epistemology; Law; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01347234198795746,"gpt":0.2763746933080931,"spread":0.2629023513201356,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0002209476,0.00003159162,0.0000542033,0.000001283392,0.0002830919,0.00001306224,0.00009689001,0.00007251525,0.000146353],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003276653,0.0000204457,0.00002889181,0.00009710454,0.0002779919,0.0001122249,0.00002744696,0.00006017403,0.000006111886],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001430081,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00002993988,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002321233,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000372035,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9995747,0.00008641025,0.00006150036,0.00004674218,0.0001006509,0.0001300404],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997985,0.00003162885,0.00003969053,0.00007838791,0.00001961817,0.00003215794],"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":[0.000003184535,0.00004511165,0.02550417,0.000007745261,0.00002625419,6.791851e-8,0.1534881,0.000001174136,0.0009187831,0.7962405,0.02175804,0.002006905],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007120153,0.000006627475,0.02305903,0.000003550462,0.00001302258,3.66019e-7,0.004461084,0.000001296247,0.000448862,0.002108035,0.9697806,0.00004633735],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7999638,0.002967183,0.00004282892,0.009131893,0.0007276286,0.0002154684,0.000005042751,0.00003038248,0.1869158],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9929315,0.0003337541,0.0001108012,0.0003306537,0.0003289608,0.000004851761,3.671083e-7,0.000002066278,0.005957084],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9480225,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2177343,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4292307678","doi":"10.1111/raju.12359","title":"Raz and the Rule of (Authoritative) Law","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","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":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Rule of law; Law; Work (physics); Position (finance); Political science; Law and economics; Philosophy; Sociology; Business; Physics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0185747673194405,"gpt":0.2898663340958504,"spread":0.2712915667764099,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004109586,0.00002278207,0.00006190687,0.000006984637,0.001483424,0.00001022201,0.00006028503,0.000006769983,0.0001307493],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005779054,0.00001628602,0.00002102133,0.00009437867,0.0009518069,0.00003771783,0.00005350888,0.00004171007,0.000002721089],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001490409,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005601083,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0129295,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001427762,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9995139,0.0001374194,0.00006326245,0.00004911197,0.0001794712,0.00005683441],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9997365,0.0001633839,0.00003034515,0.00002730978,0.00003031558,0.00001207354],"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":[0.0000128013,0.000007694603,0.0002088727,4.373263e-7,0.00001143162,2.876658e-7,0.01717873,0.000003312764,0.00001525778,0.9813517,0.0007280883,0.000481411],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000462784,0.00002799119,0.002568262,0.000002022388,0.000022869,4.158462e-7,0.02643787,0.0000136564,0.00007901642,0.3648934,0.605426,0.00006572688],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1418868,0.003294874,0.0001638103,0.03869196,0.0004029032,0.0003241207,0.0000399607,0.00002964012,0.8151659],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9988447,0.00007259219,0.0000378065,0.00032302,0.00007391146,0.00002486098,6.916145e-7,8.359809e-7,0.000621562],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8569579,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998165,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1586613920","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00203","title":"Placing Indigenous Rights to Self‐Determination in an Ecological Context","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Indigenous Studies and Ecology","field":"Health Professions","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":"Indigenous; Indigenous rights; Context (archaeology); Traditional knowledge; Environmental ethics; Land rights; Political science; Land management; Resource management (computing); Geography; Environmental resource management; Resource (disambiguation); Human rights; Land use; Environmental planning; Sociology; Ecology; Law; Archaeology","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04571723775842801,"gpt":0.3608290816082336,"spread":0.3151118438498056,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0004409651,0.000126039,0.0002617942,0.0001416162,0.002598644,0.00001054257,0.0001226588,0.0002456674,0.001500348],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006802283,0.0001076634,0.00002675849,0.000173279,0.0000153127,0.0001300407,0.00007559533,0.0003312772,0.001677159],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000581534,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006679454,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001800787,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2082325,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9980576,0.0003291814,0.0004268228,0.0002642763,0.0001049905,0.0008171478],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992378,0.0002521509,0.000102645,0.0001751557,0.0001229307,0.0001093538],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00003997219,0.0009013706,0.07680616,0.00005745331,0.00002231809,0.0001038408,0.910061,0.00004710401,0.0001055966,0.001103786,0.005596871,0.005154548],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.005708969,0.005781636,0.7222058,0.0001403325,0.00007983964,0.00002266489,0.07787924,0.0101285,0.0002958313,0.002036778,0.1741296,0.001590742],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9868822,0.00004217822,0.00008813303,0.0005734272,0.0004828757,0.001387796,0.000007050593,0.00009992111,0.01043642],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9954717,0.00001760933,0.0004705274,0.002002475,0.0002693968,0.00033703,0.000008893981,0.00001196232,0.001410397],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8321818,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994124,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2006231667","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-9337.2007.00385.x","title":"Of Mice and Men: God and the Canadian Supreme Court","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Religion, Ecology, and Ethics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Kwantlen Polytechnic University; University of British Columbia","funders":"","keywords":"Metaphysics; Supreme court; Law; Philosophy; Begging; Sociology; Epistemology; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0257359241189442,"gpt":0.2832427134253849,"spread":0.2575067893064407,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005700357,0.00003184425,0.00007589093,0.0000200784,0.0007071653,0.00001850342,0.00006038852,0.00008240213,0.00002715348],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001527636,0.00002393751,0.00001187008,0.00005898468,0.0008692024,0.00005113141,0.00000728539,0.00006764404,0.000003083178],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002597099,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004024104,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4832354,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8832048,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9995359,0.0001112823,0.0000788863,0.00006667695,0.00009583271,0.0001114885],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996083,0.0001756258,0.00003021216,0.0000538716,0.00005645307,0.00007547481],"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":[0.00002935845,0.00001682743,0.07442764,0.00001513291,0.00005123533,0.000008007614,0.2896931,0.000005330549,0.00009643428,0.4541686,0.1812634,0.0002249433],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001406943,0.00007698192,0.189305,0.000009092955,0.0000529596,0.00001651217,0.01342009,0.0003453735,0.0002685614,0.03436214,0.760501,0.0002353403],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6690908,0.001325633,0.00001255295,0.159721,0.0001658785,0.0002546918,0.000007755639,0.00001280268,0.1694088],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9956467,0.002555576,0.00005360189,0.0005006455,0.00007024116,0.000002965865,6.385598e-7,0.000002007278,0.001167648],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5792376,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5439016,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2027537097","doi":"10.1111/1467-9337.00224","title":"Delegation as a Source of Law","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"International Arbitration and Investment Law","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Okanagan University College; Okanagan College; University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Delegation; Mediation; Arbitration; Ambivalence; Character (mathematics); Law; Order (exchange); Political science; Law and economics; Sociology; Psychology; Business; Social psychology; Mathematics","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01319619880094725,"gpt":0.2247405094246471,"spread":0.2115443106236999,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0001140548,0.00006279214,0.00006573978,0.00006190096,0.000076088,0.00008169028,0.00006056351,0.00002635205,0.0009901477],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005385455,0.00005956529,0.00003919689,0.0001068188,0.00003116703,0.0006918728,0.00001010429,0.00003501851,0.0005854897],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001237412,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000163269,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0008686448,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001020639,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999481,0.000006817652,0.0001722404,0.00009257989,0.000172772,0.00007457048],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996444,0.00001162744,0.0001186619,0.00008071747,0.0001395268,0.000005046389],"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":[0.000004702651,0.00003469596,0.0003096461,0.00001067138,0.000009622069,3.598206e-7,0.0000340058,0.00005151327,0.002084281,0.9952268,0.002168401,0.00006530582],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003453047,0.00001081127,0.0003826994,0.000009800618,0.00001743915,0.000001229717,0.00004238386,0.002369653,0.02431387,0.05908194,0.9133139,0.0001109826],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1321639,0.0000137742,0.002994134,0.0005395379,0.00015269,0.0001064535,3.207833e-7,0.00004210094,0.8639871],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9841287,0.000001097869,0.0004261414,0.01303007,0.0001894726,0.00000875548,0.00001873688,0.000008383571,0.002188703],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9361448,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999231,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4409537311","doi":"10.1111/raju.12405","title":"Issue Information","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"paratext","venue":"Ratio Juris","topic":"Free Will and Agency","field":"Neuroscience","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Universität Mannheim; University of Toronto; Università di Bologna; Victoria University; Washington University in St. Louis; University of New South Wales; Victoria University of Wellington; Yale University; University of Oxford; Harvard University; University of Miami; Università degli Studi di Milano","keywords":"Philosophy; Computer science; Political science","retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01399531665492111,"gpt":0.2633569917400271,"spread":0.249361675085106,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0000475854,0.0001822432,0.0001869862,0.0001683037,0.0001471251,0.00014797,0.0003069385,0.0001996231,0.01114358],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000198324,0.0001634207,0.00007312952,0.0002978564,0.00003613758,0.0004886666,0.00007368027,0.0002483338,0.1336699],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003959511,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001894295,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00004953512,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.000003040538,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990187,0.00005355351,0.0002962845,0.000212638,0.0002314963,0.0001873669],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993944,0.0000694284,0.0001427938,0.0003106403,0.00004062869,0.00004215163],"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":[0.000003261981,0.000009955033,3.582697e-7,0.0000860238,0.000002568779,0.000001194648,0.0001425993,0.00004386924,0.001406209,0.0005541386,0.9873429,0.01040694],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009282055,0.00001930501,0.000006846856,0.00004370015,0.000008559386,0.000001314603,0.00000591613,0.0001955105,0.04676591,0.00005610289,0.9526428,0.0001612341],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001124451,0.0003015394,0.001671093,0.001088256,0.008089786,0.0003184055,0.0003175409,0.00006643058,0.9880345],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.002423722,0.001082288,0.00006504675,0.003320027,0.0006245651,0.00004775962,0.0002169867,0.00000926051,0.9922103],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1225263,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9897604,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}