{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":12,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":12,"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":"b59149ec0bd2","filters":{"venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice"}},"results":[{"id":"W11550258","doi":"10.1002/mrm.1236","title":"A comparison of South African and Canadian anti-terrorism legislation","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute","keywords":"Terrorism; Law; Duty; Political science; Legislation; Publicity; Democracy; Listing (finance); Presumption of innocence; Presumption; Business; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Kent Roach","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04988849936487587,"gpt":0.3452407630339255,"spread":0.2953522636690496,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002263108,0.0002664393,0.0001840188,0.003213874,0.005731535,0.002743245,0.0007318572,0.000701533,0.01148514],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009108755,0.0001938975,0.0002541525,0.003963974,0.001882717,0.0006954531,0.001151569,0.0009755609,0.0005400553],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03402916,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04013265,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9338077,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9721144,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9961506,0.0004012871,0.00006655388,0.0001584611,0.002092257,0.001130859],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9959266,0.0009260406,0.0002827336,0.0001883389,0.002250532,0.0004258042],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0006791808,0.0001590112,0.09255607,0.001139475,0.0001494095,0.001455806,0.03879462,0.003676094,0.006645605,0.397146,0.1317165,0.325882],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003273152,0.00007238753,0.3877984,0.0004298803,0.00006087258,0.0004821077,0.02562908,0.001045228,0.003014538,0.003234959,0.5780988,0.0001009107],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4084693,0.003705932,0.001554274,0.01217366,0.0001891222,0.0001879897,0.002874809,0.0001122601,0.5707326],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9490516,0.001771426,0.00168912,0.001245638,0.00002009631,0.00006608434,0.000685495,0.00004021503,0.04543037],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9659709,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2469,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2258367759","doi":"","title":"Regulating cases of 'extreme hate speech' in South Africa : a suggested framework for a legislated criminal sanction","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","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":"Hatred; Incitement; Mandate; Harm; Law; Political science; Criminal law; Sexual orientation; Criminology; Sociology; Psychology; Social psychology","authors":[{"name":"Joanna Botha","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04765374763878635,"gpt":0.2697585790390171,"spread":0.2221048314002308,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02372082,0.0007105732,0.0008286068,0.004049554,0.008927853,0.01239222,0.004350227,0.01700655,0.004307479],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02833944,0.0007975909,0.00151041,0.000832133,0.01599902,0.007151315,0.008161964,0.0129207,0.0007280469],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007916274,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0243886,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01539912,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02856559,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9809173,0.007206996,0.001775994,0.002402584,0.004051183,0.003645841],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9795781,0.01090724,0.00216606,0.001593696,0.00417652,0.00157839],"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":[0.00003459932,0.0001602061,0.002724893,0.0001832781,0.00002436104,0.001508759,0.00422619,0.002091985,0.002166559,0.9618508,0.006617676,0.01841068],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003863081,0.0007699775,0.01499909,0.005099085,0.0003165662,0.003546283,0.01753404,0.01903247,0.007255947,0.5889612,0.3413068,0.0007922375],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1104244,0.006480278,0.2543175,0.3078305,0.004979653,0.002748261,0.0001870929,0.0005830012,0.3124493],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.814872,0.001800842,0.1195245,0.03315158,0.001220296,0.002358862,0.00006603326,0.00008625891,0.02691969],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02372082,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1254492,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2287127029","doi":"","title":"'Stacking the odds against the accused' : appraising the curial attitude towards amici participation in criminal matters","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","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; Odds; Political science; Jurisprudence; Compromise; Sociology; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"Tebello Thabane","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1306880141118046,"gpt":0.3707971402106607,"spread":0.2401091260988561,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01866118,0.0003981512,0.0003737076,0.002412078,0.01461831,0.0144147,0.001729313,0.01177541,0.003632335],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05766625,0.0004104383,0.0004750818,0.001694617,0.04514334,0.008174112,0.009205007,0.009271175,0.0006442407],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006926862,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00697417,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01226906,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02341039,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9758783,0.01499127,0.0006080047,0.0008700388,0.004683793,0.002968573],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9733315,0.01656726,0.004371099,0.0007581961,0.003458507,0.001513435],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001307374,0.00006431706,0.01244639,0.0002335903,0.0000256525,0.002879176,0.3565637,0.000135549,0.0009376744,0.5980643,0.008081849,0.020437],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006546566,0.0004328186,0.04190895,0.00266335,0.0001243852,0.003069681,0.6249257,0.000817875,0.001732453,0.1386224,0.1854645,0.0001723843],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.530602,0.004134866,0.003990081,0.08946207,0.000450534,0.0001373565,0.00002293794,0.00002522822,0.3711749],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9854977,0.000764813,0.0005050385,0.008418687,0.0001334915,0.00004453073,0.000004527788,0.00001036927,0.004620871],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.01866118,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.09869099,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1900986889","doi":"","title":"Constitutional exclusion under s 35(5) of the Constitution: should an accused bear a 'threshold burden' of proving that his or her constitutional right has been infringed?","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","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; Constitution; Law; Charter; Supreme court; Constitutional right; Political science; Interpretation (philosophy); Philosophy","authors":[{"name":"Dane Ally","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1186084381249842,"gpt":0.3408303341006635,"spread":0.2222218959756793,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01904865,0.0004510018,0.0008318436,0.001838418,0.006948811,0.008522029,0.001669872,0.00970541,0.003432828],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03184343,0.0005420478,0.0008895937,0.001203239,0.03575749,0.006603702,0.006616295,0.01004695,0.0005631574],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00691791,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02151672,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02765091,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02931338,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9800407,0.006356525,0.002106258,0.002067117,0.00616141,0.003268084],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9792782,0.01403935,0.002130833,0.001635364,0.002345106,0.0005711525],"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":[0.00002239159,0.000009920337,0.0008240009,0.00005430148,0.00001091172,0.0003902413,0.006687514,0.0001477181,0.0007494101,0.9860394,0.0009457539,0.004118498],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008341988,0.0002369107,0.007978313,0.001354207,0.0001675706,0.001357999,0.01470478,0.0009745032,0.00315968,0.7607879,0.2089758,0.0002188635],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3267488,0.00601333,0.02718227,0.07176161,0.001482223,0.0002984812,0.0002102422,0.00009344472,0.5662097],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9781155,0.0009356301,0.004535895,0.008664693,0.000331744,0.00012502,0.00004312543,0.00001741205,0.007230996],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02765091,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1007401,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1824834794","doi":"","title":"Sentencing the corporate offender in South Africa : a comparative approach","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Corporation; Punishment (psychology); Commission; Sentencing guidelines; Political science; Criminal law; Law; Corporate crime; Criminal procedure; Criminology; Corporate law; Sentence; Business; Sociology; Psychology; Corporate governance","authors":[{"name":"Du Toit","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1706108760139859,"gpt":0.3380569271859532,"spread":0.1674460511719673,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003033375,0.0005067089,0.0005647449,0.007111978,0.007318388,0.004078154,0.0008700536,0.002399807,0.007617602],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009391539,0.0004024971,0.0004336842,0.006836495,0.003426937,0.004082298,0.003288657,0.001985979,0.0004335195],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0100082,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005598644,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03416087,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09567657,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9971557,0.001972193,0.00008797264,0.00006813849,0.0002053942,0.0005105988],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9975674,0.0014952,0.0003235911,0.00007180884,0.000410469,0.0001315621],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0009314613,0.0008400006,0.02889649,0.007093835,0.0002463955,0.02428033,0.2929168,0.001678045,0.004526932,0.4685389,0.007096264,0.1629546],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000115884,0.001497503,0.09223757,0.008213506,0.0005486444,0.00977993,0.7247327,0.001228708,0.002286362,0.02457427,0.1346848,0.0001001229],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.757743,0.03202051,0.001584874,0.006616069,0.0003095002,0.000499776,0.0001988901,0.000007441069,0.20102],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9662932,0.02615783,0.001331275,0.0006995833,0.00006247597,0.0001910239,0.00005644416,0.00000803717,0.005200173],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.03416087,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07261491,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4384451809","doi":"10.47348/sacj/v36/i1a5","title":"The adequacy of rape criminalisation in modern South Africa: A comparative study","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Jurisdiction; CLARITY; Law; Criminology; Political science; Criminal law; Sexual assault; Sentence; Sociology; Poison control; Human factors and ergonomics","authors":[{"name":"Rinda Botha","is_ca":false},{"name":"Janine Peens","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1272580506083708,"gpt":0.3789522234718644,"spread":0.2516941728634937,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001992287,0.0002570667,0.0003974221,0.00396397,0.005039142,0.002906699,0.0005450865,0.0007760026,0.005145784],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009089611,0.0003420535,0.0002382224,0.004802714,0.007236267,0.002836681,0.003278354,0.001607689,0.0002406101],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006859963,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002909878,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.04407829,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.09829617,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986694,0.0005936716,0.00009768477,0.00008805126,0.0001962677,0.0003548637],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9971077,0.001468804,0.0008047711,0.0001273737,0.0002816614,0.000209767],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002982706,0.0002740875,0.112054,0.001800818,0.0001253189,0.009715045,0.7246304,0.000362111,0.001526264,0.07805117,0.001778182,0.06938433],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002345757,0.0002532014,0.3189839,0.001581122,0.00007667244,0.005425454,0.6279465,0.0001967526,0.000368349,0.004026439,0.04106922,0.00004898059],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9727377,0.004302086,0.0001015128,0.001266596,0.00002302931,0.00005315461,0.00005548742,0.00000157664,0.0214587],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9944318,0.004309071,0.0001006007,0.0001271504,0.00001645027,0.00001956778,0.00002400803,0.000003566121,0.0009678046],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.04407829,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08764344,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3132853333","doi":"10.47348/sacj/v33/i3a5","title":"Revising spousal testimonial privilege and marital communications privilege in South African criminal procedure: Is abolition or extension the answer? Part 2","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Testimonial; Privilege (computing); Law; Context (archaeology); Political science; Sociology; Criminology; History; Business; Advertising","authors":[{"name":"Samantha Goosen","is_ca":false},{"name":"Nicci Whitear-Nel","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07818039969400453,"gpt":0.3359840769126949,"spread":0.2578036772186904,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01031075,0.0003151594,0.0005186435,0.002212803,0.005285915,0.007584556,0.001544655,0.006479595,0.004257572],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04149691,0.0004802281,0.0006429398,0.001664524,0.02517685,0.008447863,0.007481066,0.01038281,0.0002352735],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01232886,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.03208964,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0756815,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1186217,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9930009,0.00296453,0.0006727288,0.0005402222,0.001582636,0.001238948],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9715379,0.02110967,0.003370493,0.0007204912,0.0024504,0.0008110572],"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":[0.00006004546,0.00009725356,0.01277871,0.00112299,0.00003859282,0.001746027,0.0373391,0.0006182488,0.0005222762,0.856092,0.01170613,0.07787858],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005331892,0.0001892322,0.05725773,0.01848359,0.000289719,0.004131321,0.09470206,0.002014531,0.001654073,0.4531471,0.3678181,0.0002591309],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1862659,0.1452187,0.01232357,0.4644248,0.004593526,0.0003872555,0.0001596887,0.00001943625,0.1866071],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9034351,0.04659279,0.002388608,0.03743795,0.002357772,0.0001560204,0.00004379317,0.00001454979,0.007573561],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.0756815,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.150482,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3211268824","doi":"","title":"Quantification of damages for malicious prosecution: A comparative analysis of recent South African and Commonwealth case law (2)","year":2018,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Damages; Law; Tort; Plaintiff; Confusion; Political science; Commonwealth; Cause of action; Action (physics); Element (criminal law); Liability; Psychology","authors":[{"name":"Chuks Okpaluba","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1150550030177364,"gpt":0.4004993345167652,"spread":0.2854443314990289,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008532684,0.000242543,0.0003254216,0.01221226,0.006931144,0.004436426,0.001189391,0.001733232,0.00448798],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03267426,0.0004062126,0.0004417146,0.0121714,0.005955474,0.004002922,0.003847554,0.002004222,0.0001789322],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0129766,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004508311,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06382126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1824031,"domain_scores_codex":[0.996304,0.001352151,0.0003342556,0.0002145048,0.0008514312,0.0009436608],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9762656,0.01737159,0.003568537,0.0004349269,0.001838177,0.0005211501],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003060082,0.000392187,0.1853191,0.001801779,0.0001981237,0.01702769,0.3712632,0.001275023,0.001563178,0.3523987,0.006808969,0.06164621],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002542823,0.000284568,0.5260143,0.002376351,0.0001805016,0.007681482,0.3666393,0.001524811,0.001373723,0.01704177,0.0767233,0.0001344475],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9536983,0.007615922,0.0005318748,0.002955208,0.0000529197,0.0001159479,0.0001096857,0.000003759362,0.03491645],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9947725,0.003433131,0.0002269469,0.0002419415,0.00002213587,0.00003584217,0.00003357758,0.000003832675,0.00123006],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.06382126,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1268995,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W189665483","doi":"","title":"Judicial discretion to exclude evidence in terms of s 35(5) of the Constitution : S v Hena 2006 (2) SACR 33 (SE) : comments","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Charter; Constitution; Law; Discretion; Political science; Section (typography); Judicial discretion; Economic Justice; Judicial review; Business","authors":[{"name":"Wouter De Vos","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07030531263123174,"gpt":0.3675662191141264,"spread":0.2972609064828947,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02573239,0.000924542,0.001451208,0.001394492,0.01179482,0.0103723,0.005830939,0.05261986,0.005541302],"category_scores_gemma":[0.05568888,0.001498591,0.002112193,0.001164305,0.01309575,0.004800727,0.004505789,0.03529211,0.002357759],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007720462,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01780249,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07229517,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1280547,"domain_scores_codex":[0.981168,0.003591339,0.002832989,0.003025152,0.005276292,0.004106253],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9709458,0.02237657,0.001215338,0.001267372,0.003452659,0.0007421517],"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":[0.0001520263,0.00008393514,0.00226,0.0002781946,0.00009639312,0.003839576,0.01412418,0.0005696662,0.004501823,0.7744085,0.191144,0.008541782],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002963656,0.000235118,0.004752461,0.002062614,0.0002955302,0.00208208,0.008110349,0.001670685,0.007947991,0.1634986,0.8084858,0.0005623921],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"commentary","genre_scores_codex":[0.08307818,0.004519439,0.01675156,0.4096012,0.008906547,0.001056524,0.001161323,0.0004919093,0.4744334],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.3820061,0.001496946,0.007250693,0.5308623,0.003025606,0.0006758269,0.0001705634,0.000157665,0.07435436],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07229517,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1437488,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2282477943","doi":"","title":"The role of pathological gambling in the sentencing of a person convicted of armed robbery : a comparative discussion of the South African, Canadian and Australian jurisdictions : comments","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"Appeal; Criminology; Law; Supreme court; Political science; Psychology","authors":[{"name":"Marita Carnelly","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0816407160527359,"gpt":0.3236185034298723,"spread":0.2419777873771364,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005301364,0.0003592972,0.0004172082,0.002362596,0.02733376,0.005237239,0.002506881,0.00694298,0.00218624],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01631985,0.0003533286,0.0006324286,0.002325066,0.01104697,0.001643374,0.00290541,0.008382054,0.000193443],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.03082509,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.06469432,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8918672,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9640396,"domain_scores_codex":[0.996155,0.0008399403,0.0002027804,0.0002018731,0.0008494191,0.001750923],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9938689,0.002964631,0.0004886542,0.00009307923,0.001571538,0.001013316],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001395224,0.0001519872,0.03800004,0.0007110109,0.00004697328,0.01882089,0.7223114,0.000515578,0.001478217,0.1452359,0.04285433,0.02973418],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001450832,0.00008934111,0.07891933,0.001071513,0.000109053,0.002086441,0.8352578,0.0002381464,0.0005809959,0.003797845,0.07771339,0.0001215501],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"commentary","genre_scores_codex":[0.6382439,0.008531747,0.0004374958,0.2397867,0.001121105,0.0002074897,0.0001447662,0.00001381721,0.111513],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9430702,0.006793848,0.0004853467,0.03360022,0.0004084786,0.00008851283,0.00004261745,0.00001189147,0.01549901],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1081328,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2236527,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1930724199","doi":"","title":"Pillay and Others v S : trial fairness; the doctrine of discoverability; and the concept of 'detriment' - the impact of the Canadian s 24 (2) provision on South African s 35 (5) jurisprudence : comment","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Discoverability; Jurisprudence; Doctrine; Law; Political science; Computer science; World Wide Web","authors":[{"name":"Dane Ally","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0259280608459404,"gpt":0.3247955542952449,"spread":0.2988674934493045,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02501965,0.001155041,0.002327482,0.002148164,0.02149809,0.0119189,0.008802534,0.1263654,0.008335881],"category_scores_gemma":[0.08609014,0.001909784,0.002376236,0.003015592,0.03242583,0.008083645,0.004868778,0.05839124,0.001683873],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.02053958,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.04142488,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4864874,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5686581,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9782654,0.005458527,0.001616375,0.00429255,0.005919549,0.00444771],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9293279,0.05919994,0.002229153,0.002181373,0.005055593,0.002006011],"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":[0.00009098374,0.00002747435,0.0004349152,0.00008987727,0.00003770324,0.0003019323,0.005463021,0.0002088799,0.0002129828,0.8754012,0.1158189,0.001912279],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007393244,0.0001535397,0.004729121,0.0009189383,0.0002912389,0.0005201634,0.007452858,0.001484923,0.002330327,0.4693341,0.5114973,0.0005482268],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","genre_scores_codex":[0.01886081,0.004293277,0.002696678,0.8192384,0.004673839,0.0002900149,0.0004949141,0.0001383067,0.1493137],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1363249,0.001297448,0.002018494,0.8209165,0.00448921,0.0003966882,0.00005105335,0.0000890646,0.03441656],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5135126,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9673116,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2106245212","doi":"","title":"Should legal professional privilege be limited to exclude in-house lawyers under South African criminal law? : comment","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"South African Journal of Criminal Justice","topic":"Legal Education and Practice Innovations","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; Privilege (computing); Political science; Legal profession; Common law; Criminal law","authors":[{"name":"Wium P. De Villiers","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1794632987499983,"gpt":0.3903842138655562,"spread":0.2109209151155579,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01422587,0.0006576054,0.001142881,0.0006849605,0.01191757,0.004517729,0.008120226,0.0930515,0.01121286],"category_scores_gemma":[0.04442556,0.001092546,0.002063251,0.001356567,0.01325404,0.01040559,0.006319084,0.05647263,0.003806593],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006501346,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01573563,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.08605102,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1289669,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9921594,0.001355284,0.0007394208,0.002077385,0.001937269,0.001731374],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9651724,0.02559547,0.001994372,0.001157342,0.004101858,0.001978552],"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":[0.0001167206,0.00005820849,0.002868782,0.0002858381,0.00003792741,0.00217519,0.01356336,0.000197422,0.001011665,0.08662926,0.8870364,0.006019172],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002369192,0.0001563142,0.01087392,0.00131616,0.0001448279,0.002554956,0.03666189,0.0007700754,0.002271534,0.0573343,0.8872797,0.0003993585],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","genre_scores_codex":[0.002253856,0.0003256153,0.0002130669,0.9900115,0.001875946,0.00002036705,0.0000773193,0.00003033512,0.005192],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.01120588,0.0002592715,0.0002074288,0.9833876,0.001882248,0.00003736168,0.00001720307,0.00001504611,0.002988067],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","teacher_disagreement_score":0.0930515,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1711003,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}