{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":384,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":384,"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":"7dc7b5565411","filters":{"venue":"Supreme Court law review"}},"results":[{"id":"W1906128875","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1227","title":"Canadian Federalism and the Principle of Subsidiarity: Should We Open Pandora's Box?","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":24,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Subsidiarity; Federalism; Supreme court; Political science; Law; Cooperative federalism; Law and economics; Government (linguistics); Sociology; European union; Economics; Politics; Philosophy","authors":[{"name":"Eugénie Brouillet","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.144546900590988,"gpt":0.3639773841618273,"spread":0.2194304835708393,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002118658,0.0001521317,0.0005661745,0.00001063222,0.00112629,0.0001113492,0.0007058289,0.00008241532,0.0007213435],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000385947,0.00008940954,0.0001139029,0.0001680469,0.0009238743,0.0002677254,0.0002572314,0.0001632094,0.00003266489],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000141786,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000182183,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.843593,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.886089,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982189,0.0005238503,0.000334581,0.0002244162,0.0003275257,0.0003707148],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990217,0.0001348159,0.0001480502,0.0002549115,0.0002123192,0.0002282128],"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":[0.00001568702,0.00002316952,0.00280983,0.0004872115,0.00009869521,0.000004605633,0.01219045,2.690298e-8,0.000002398806,0.9748951,0.00735329,0.002119601],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003884438,0.00001195313,0.001333227,0.0007050446,0.0001092588,0.000001041223,0.0005426641,7.696835e-7,0.00001706739,0.002963882,0.9937782,0.0001484601],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01305671,0.3636027,0.000003794826,0.1611062,0.0005229742,0.006871611,0.00007278058,0.00007133345,0.4546919],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7665686,0.2255677,0.0003041647,0.005038386,0.00009363193,0.0001466581,0.000004600227,0.00001376342,0.002262498],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9864249,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8662627,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1491901897","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1107","title":"So What is the Real Legacy of Oakes?: Two Decades of Proportionality Analysis under the Canadian Charter’s Section 1","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":23,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Deference; Supreme court; Adjudication; Law; Political science; Proportionality (law); Context (archaeology); Sociology; History","authors":[{"name":"Sujit Choudhry","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0420602414364565,"gpt":0.3336171573435262,"spread":0.2915569159070697,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001363648,0.00008824266,0.0002900784,0.00003012852,0.001262633,0.00008401941,0.0002308885,0.00003898576,0.000328823],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002866145,0.00005057537,0.0002531531,0.0007294737,0.001430529,0.0002742053,0.00002171987,0.00008682571,0.000007667069],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000126832,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006063791,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9194801,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9785711,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985114,0.0002452346,0.0003700645,0.0001488358,0.0005348059,0.0001896238],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990793,0.00008438704,0.0002145193,0.0001897268,0.00038544,0.00004662919],"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":[0.000001728613,0.00002251472,0.006619164,0.00005686185,0.0002143685,3.407225e-7,0.0003464597,0.0000141689,0.000005560668,0.98994,0.001649371,0.001129432],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008895773,0.00001413449,0.06200607,0.0005655227,0.001217771,9.14032e-7,0.001566294,0.000006645864,0.0000376373,0.0434133,0.8909264,0.000156407],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.07389379,0.3372896,0.0001665412,0.2928941,0.001065987,0.002900593,0.0001738452,0.00006880761,0.2915467],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9671223,0.03088982,0.000008184815,0.001565453,0.0002422718,0.00002596741,0.00001338553,0.000002605203,0.0001300015],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9465267,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9711282,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1561852027","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1206","title":"Facilitating Intergovernmental Dialogue: Judicial Review of the Division of Powers in the Supreme Court of Canada","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"European and International Law Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":22,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Law; Jurisdiction; Separation of powers; Politics; Political science; Original jurisdiction; Order (exchange); Power (physics); Division (mathematics); Supreme Court Decisions; Government (linguistics); Economics","authors":[{"name":"Wade K. Wright","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02225469304308671,"gpt":0.2931431870909805,"spread":0.2708884940478938,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002700266,0.0001156955,0.000426712,0.000009840749,0.0001508703,0.000005991836,0.0008096088,0.00002476803,0.0002734354],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002301529,0.00006880675,0.0001803749,0.0002182026,0.0005369594,0.00008571957,0.0001506841,0.0002136953,0.000002293559],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00008525272,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002857465,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1523394,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6075011,"domain_scores_codex":[0.997278,0.0005489737,0.0007006119,0.0001467161,0.001144644,0.000181094],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985461,0.00047517,0.0004149431,0.0002862016,0.0002447781,0.00003276585],"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":[0.00002681451,0.0003199562,0.01208981,0.02254341,0.0001861661,0.000006711922,0.007685971,0.00000183966,0.001701792,0.8147281,0.1339904,0.006719022],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001728561,0.00005541706,0.005125946,0.03234062,0.00007292043,0.000001204228,0.001201492,0.000002485822,0.0001885129,0.0003455582,0.9603468,0.0001462169],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1057018,0.2733929,0.000008903677,0.02845791,0.002703119,0.003027884,0.000593308,0.00001758087,0.5860966],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9308807,0.0664523,0.00002953872,0.002451319,0.00004768019,0.000008981848,0.000005093925,0.000006404878,0.0001180022],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8263564,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8533053,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2573745411","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1307","title":"Aboriginal Title and Private Property","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":21,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Victoria; Banff Centre; Nexen (Canada)","funders":"","keywords":"Declaration; Supreme court; Indigenous; Law; Political science; Constitution; Private property; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"John Borrows","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04250402339728181,"gpt":0.353776483323768,"spread":0.3112724599264862,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006012947,0.00004036368,0.00009068178,0.000006577684,0.0005374856,0.0000171703,0.00007419832,0.00002746094,0.0003781565],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00000297523,0.00002308,0.00001425677,0.00006311306,0.00009378237,0.00006971206,4.245131e-7,0.00004404272,0.0006776708],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004505033,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002297428,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01272818,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05947224,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9994739,0.00008333585,0.00008506275,0.00008167617,0.0001405022,0.000135516],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996709,0.000008244085,0.00002751577,0.00008903095,0.00009108652,0.0001132575],"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":[6.630203e-7,0.00001751982,0.00006176357,0.0003267962,0.000002964549,8.018412e-7,0.009126474,6.907658e-9,1.324035e-7,0.96624,0.02326304,0.0009598068],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000253817,0.000008951469,0.000008648451,0.0002081027,0.000008875574,0.000001183394,0.00002342776,2.591621e-7,0.000001831037,0.001130804,0.9985375,0.00004503995],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.00108153,0.04011294,0.0000057056,0.001713321,0.0004249882,0.0003903474,0.000001596121,0.0000317948,0.9562378],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.006566985,0.8697401,0.0007447061,0.001164776,0.0009655172,0.000006880595,0.000009913198,0.00001503701,0.120786],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9752744,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9938461,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1878148134","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1129","title":"Aboriginal Over-representation and R. v. Gladue: Where We Were, Where We Are and Where We Might Be Going","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":21,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Representation (politics); Supreme court; Political science; Law; History; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Jonathan Rudin","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05892869499764502,"gpt":0.3632767423738641,"spread":0.3043480473762191,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["metaepi_narrow","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006772309,0.0003252134,0.0006543304,0.00003624856,0.001086615,0.0001874001,0.0003374861,0.0001610935,0.001163983],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007656834,0.0002933806,0.0001529187,0.0003332448,0.0006586982,0.001032369,0.00007147127,0.0003008755,0.00009132276],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001035395,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001844453,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004361642,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05395872,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9971574,0.0003872298,0.0004961136,0.0006384798,0.0007842604,0.000536508],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9985294,0.0002616524,0.0002745151,0.0003929717,0.0002042696,0.0003372138],"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":[0.00009245874,0.0001827373,0.04761425,0.03490407,0.0001362952,0.0004210181,0.01069118,0.000002189288,0.0001633691,0.1050211,0.7755948,0.02517653],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002660181,0.00004827103,0.0009012733,0.01671543,0.0001648548,0.00006466975,0.0007976671,0.000009379855,0.00001143107,0.0006079036,0.9800509,0.0003622544],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.009364684,0.8718424,0.00001741196,0.1064148,0.0003373827,0.0007253907,0.00003121059,0.0001002735,0.01116639],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.03636347,0.9570879,0.0003178909,0.0007296021,0.0003933024,0.00003883996,0.000006115327,0.00002784796,0.005034971],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.204456,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999518,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1571323056","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1259","title":"(Ab)Originalism and Canada’s Constitution","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Originalism; Constitution; Treaty; Interpretation (philosophy); Constitutional interpretation; Law; Political science; Constitutional law; Relation (database); Law of the land; Sociology; Philosophy; Linguistics","authors":[{"name":"John Borrows","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04329375384612381,"gpt":0.3276469139933314,"spread":0.2843531601472076,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006815359,0.0001118519,0.0002511428,0.000004382662,0.0007881366,0.00002899816,0.0001103861,0.00004285788,0.0002645157],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002267965,0.00008553202,0.00004239684,0.00007027363,0.0004680849,0.0002990875,0.00004018786,0.0000952174,0.0000379966],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002945442,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002463657,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9177017,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8961493,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987907,0.0001703692,0.0001753349,0.0001274161,0.000367311,0.0003688354],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.999441,0.00007122936,0.00006790785,0.00009603035,0.0001175644,0.0002062289],"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":[9.680587e-7,0.00001399794,0.005654805,0.0004556678,0.00003062481,0.0000021984,0.001036813,5.277804e-8,0.000007507211,0.8994328,0.09147286,0.001891647],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005586618,0.000002893095,0.001335999,0.000436712,0.00006093697,0.00000221203,0.0002426139,1.487895e-7,0.000005179233,0.00005729895,0.997672,0.0001281414],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01038577,0.6614399,0.0000123708,0.04592367,0.001574443,0.001215624,0.00002725137,0.0001149041,0.2793061],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8753155,0.1196523,0.0001503099,0.003657334,0.0004271583,0.0000282113,0.000006170022,0.000004631687,0.0007583778],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9061992,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6061789,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1545588899","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1183","title":"The Constitutional Status of the Supreme Court of Canada","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":19,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Constitution; Supreme court; Law; Statute; Parliamentary sovereignty; Political science; Parliament; Sovereign immunity; Separation of powers; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Warren J. Newman","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03048684956872575,"gpt":0.2914957824644766,"spread":0.2610089328957508,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007600895,0.0001071505,0.0003004194,0.000006075026,0.001268765,0.00001239597,0.0004274185,0.00003302519,0.0001280676],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005961668,0.00006120805,0.0001404352,0.0002681344,0.003120207,0.0000674832,0.0000523624,0.0001116246,0.000003593667],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001699011,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003636479,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4006059,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7203149,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9980032,0.0001918253,0.0004060225,0.0001287125,0.0008932145,0.0003770018],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988065,0.0002282003,0.0002029559,0.0002155377,0.0004555137,0.00009126002],"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":[0.000004111823,0.00001864912,0.0008717035,0.00004246582,0.00002956348,6.720866e-7,0.00006171614,0.00000319276,0.00001132839,0.9738209,0.02405219,0.001083499],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007675466,0.00001292601,0.003475003,0.0007015742,0.0000571071,0.000001162181,0.0001314861,6.702215e-7,0.00003564503,0.0161916,0.9792359,0.00008017113],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.001881226,0.2968147,0.00003472034,0.0745285,0.001228868,0.001165858,0.0002020136,0.00002602696,0.6241181],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9389951,0.05830394,0.00001891176,0.002326193,0.0001101972,0.000009164989,0.000002651473,0.000001915231,0.0002319169],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9576293,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995927,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1751803832","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1172","title":"A More Lasting Comfort?: The Politics of Minimum Sentences, the Rule of Law and R. v. Ferguson","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Politics; Law; Punishment (psychology); Supreme court; Economic Justice; Political science; Criminal justice; Psychology; Social psychology","authors":[{"name":"Benjamin L. Berger","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05607256762659776,"gpt":0.3494054192767731,"spread":0.2933328516501753,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001245094,0.0001006751,0.000301017,0.00000678541,0.0004837608,0.00002851518,0.0003892583,0.00003837105,0.00003760089],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002136056,0.00005587858,0.0001015102,0.0001460351,0.0008100086,0.0001196339,0.00005021314,0.0001100399,0.000002481179],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002472218,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000711093,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008083044,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002757696,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986589,0.0001899754,0.0003528902,0.0001341064,0.0004176115,0.0002465236],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989856,0.0003446085,0.0001895914,0.0002633175,0.0001529018,0.00006397143],"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":[0.000003836941,0.00003206094,0.0002749265,0.0007577091,0.00001240496,0.00000170714,0.002835894,8.417711e-7,0.00006913738,0.9914203,0.002335072,0.00225617],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008238128,0.00007946714,0.0004631928,0.00421929,0.0001961899,0.000008667132,0.001523649,0.00002141062,0.0001369619,0.007949879,0.985191,0.0001278363],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.09123498,0.4431798,0.00004297362,0.3039806,0.0003852241,0.002084156,0.00005839431,0.00007654237,0.1589573],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9689972,0.02480748,0.0001084322,0.005650735,0.000103372,0.000005425637,0.000001635987,0.000004898815,0.0003208654],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9834704,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9985222,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1804800675","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1012","title":"“Grand Entrance Hall,” Back Door or Foundation Stone? the Role of Constitutional Principles in Construing and Applying the Constitution of Canada","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Constitution; Foundation (evidence); Law; Classics; Philosophy; Sociology; Art; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Warren J. Newman","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04364868291440584,"gpt":0.3029809875130487,"spread":0.2593323045986429,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000942743,0.00009652355,0.0002715699,0.000006758846,0.0006071178,0.00002162411,0.0001654562,0.00003248584,0.0001230231],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004301409,0.00005176143,0.00004002482,0.0001807467,0.003069657,0.0001455845,0.00003863136,0.00009860119,0.000001346416],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001427583,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006766737,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2060477,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7622508,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987304,0.0001941385,0.0003718532,0.0001311669,0.0003835857,0.0001888457],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991411,0.0003322945,0.0002062746,0.00009776104,0.00018615,0.00003644362],"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":[0.0000168858,0.00001645482,0.009397039,0.0003450941,0.00003370517,0.000001161272,0.001168601,0.00009419897,0.00009385678,0.9837578,0.0001308536,0.004944379],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000287156,0.000007518055,0.001424759,0.001889631,0.00005899355,0.000007283712,0.002011231,0.0001353972,0.00009175912,0.0005249495,0.9934461,0.0001152685],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2019404,0.3929203,0.000499057,0.03533778,0.0008058221,0.01335017,0.000141969,0.00005775714,0.3549468],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9631772,0.03625892,0.0001403842,0.0002385375,0.00002876697,0.00007372958,0.000003342737,0.000001703482,0.00007743957],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9933152,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996434,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1776435105","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1282","title":"Judging in Secular Times: Max Weber and the Rise of Proportionality","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":16,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Proportionality (law); Jurisprudence; Bureaucracy; Law; Metaphysics; Sociology; Churning; The Imaginary; Political science; Law and economics; Epistemology; Philosophy; Economics; Politics; Psychology","authors":[{"name":"David Schneiderman","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02450805635767055,"gpt":0.2971709197602406,"spread":0.2726628634025701,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001314341,0.00006136754,0.0002419262,0.000008310261,0.0002434112,0.00001555989,0.0001065674,0.00002462491,0.0005420714],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002033958,0.00003754814,0.00006187073,0.0001480952,0.001314356,0.000120146,0.00005013817,0.00006728158,0.0000411033],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002381969,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008687814,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02346592,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002935754,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990171,0.0002242562,0.0002448118,0.0001088547,0.0002756948,0.000129288],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995806,0.00007982996,0.00007967237,0.00008595386,0.0001419986,0.0000319833],"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":[0.000002320134,0.00001666371,0.003734735,0.000162911,0.00001661318,7.311554e-7,0.0002750363,2.898226e-7,0.000002555998,0.9923576,0.002036718,0.001393849],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003604976,0.000007413225,0.007974525,0.00185387,0.00007545018,0.000001899908,0.0003442474,0.00001020258,0.000005216407,0.1961772,0.7930492,0.0001402796],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.03491296,0.5833085,0.00003097062,0.08024391,0.0002390607,0.002845961,0.00001114507,0.00003906255,0.2983684],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9484095,0.05017279,0.00004445906,0.001068067,0.00005387956,0.00008567967,0.000001110307,0.000002215862,0.0001623291],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9134965,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9830369,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1782902411","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1076","title":"State Neutrality and Freedom of Conscience and Religion","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Jurisprudence; Supreme court; Neutrality; Freedom of religion; Political science; Charter; Sociology; Pluralism (philosophy); Establishment Clause; Secular state; Separation of church and state; Politics; Human rights","authors":[{"name":"Bruce Ryder","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02759103481695941,"gpt":0.3230506339689826,"spread":0.2954595991520232,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006754728,0.00006355003,0.0001958871,0.000009012207,0.0002080946,0.00001739651,0.00009504177,0.000021784,0.00004958087],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001065605,0.0000556552,0.00002913919,0.00009530449,0.002582825,0.0001579841,0.00003140866,0.00005405973,0.000005751867],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002086333,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002893891,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005485084,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002273316,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991794,0.0001187635,0.0001996819,0.0001363637,0.0001977565,0.0001679885],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994692,0.0001165824,0.00008189941,0.0001052405,0.0001016579,0.0001253831],"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":[9.816858e-7,0.000006491811,0.0006357505,0.0001503599,0.000002818889,4.63226e-7,0.0001109469,7.132932e-7,0.00001673872,0.9962727,0.001194288,0.00160771],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005327922,0.00001421068,0.0002643408,0.0003714514,0.00002194185,0.000003561492,0.00002016431,0.000003317284,0.00001820017,0.001659381,0.9974982,0.00007197462],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.08072347,0.3392072,0.0002759371,0.04439546,0.0002747247,0.001120045,0.0001608665,0.00009397163,0.5337484],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8758017,0.120693,0.0005942245,0.002528257,0.00005501254,0.000003261341,0.000001389101,0.000002261542,0.0003208521],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9963039,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9516527,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1688268775","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1105","title":"The Long and Winding Road: Case Comment on Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada (Minister of Canadian Heritage)","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"International Maritime Law Issues","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":15,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Manitoba; Assembly of First Nations","funders":"","keywords":"Treaty; Law; Settlement (finance); Political science; Prima facie; First nation; Government (linguistics); Plaintiff; Indigenous","authors":[{"name":"Bryan P. Schwartz","is_ca":true},{"name":"Darla L. Rettie","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01889525557264394,"gpt":0.2259836741059277,"spread":0.2070884185332838,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003247073,0.0001181611,0.0001537647,0.00001702245,0.0003323915,0.00003615313,0.0001758817,0.00002571664,0.0006587108],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002949025,0.00009212169,0.00003306834,0.0001149835,0.0001256754,0.00008794884,0.00006188416,0.00007639844,0.00002423244],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0004951819,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00004109838,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9943972,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9994869,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989357,0.0000585519,0.0002787015,0.0001744609,0.0003443814,0.0002082288],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994813,0.0001045538,0.00008997746,0.0002118714,0.00002287545,0.00008940398],"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":[0.00002812159,0.0001581843,0.03907217,0.001841174,0.0001154548,0.002255887,0.0001859379,0.0003145458,0.0000609481,0.1798431,0.7607817,0.01534277],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000866287,0.00002200249,0.005070813,0.0006158721,0.0000213055,0.0001122866,0.00001096793,0.00005446024,0.00008612491,0.0001103332,0.993696,0.0001132158],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1746701,0.04025213,0.00001066515,0.2340299,0.0008841793,0.003232623,0.0003077657,0.00004612965,0.5465664],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9911488,0.001422902,0.0000654999,0.006386643,0.0000375867,0.00002168696,0.00002064763,0.00001219413,0.0008839808],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8164787,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7212421,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1898755370","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1086","title":"Aboriginal Rights and the Honour of the Crown","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":14,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Honour; Supreme court; Settlement (finance); Political science; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Brian Slattery","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01305975378385767,"gpt":0.3191276542854641,"spread":0.3060679005016065,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002147511,0.00008640901,0.0002301727,0.000009301556,0.004298859,0.00002731318,0.0003545576,0.00004901583,0.0002606877],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000006054639,0.00003723249,0.00009433448,0.0001412865,0.0009097654,0.0001243038,0.000001412187,0.0001443405,0.00004144625],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005614572,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002246244,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07147183,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6371078,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984143,0.0006207118,0.0002749817,0.0001313386,0.000311277,0.0002474418],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991911,0.0001442755,0.0001552948,0.000271949,0.0001661635,0.00007118784],"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":[0.000003866129,0.00002634965,0.00002540084,0.0002246542,0.000008308643,1.192872e-7,0.04152623,1.342939e-7,1.758527e-7,0.9563872,0.001411517,0.0003860131],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001384602,0.000005482443,0.0001076118,0.0005445317,0.00005013724,0.000003126395,0.00007154354,8.648179e-7,0.0000194277,0.004001907,0.9949977,0.00005922872],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.06745325,0.2843013,0.00001063719,0.03647283,0.001212514,0.003055023,0.0000121818,0.00004776662,0.6074345],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.2384963,0.7403236,0.0001936834,0.002004851,0.00125986,0.00001267869,0.00000221852,0.00001076461,0.01769609],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9935862,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9969974,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1565791337","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1205","title":"The Capital Markets Perspective on a National Securities Regulator","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Global Financial Regulation and Crises","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":13,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"Australian Government","keywords":"Constitutionality; Supreme court; Legislation; Law; Business; Political science; Economics; Accounting","authors":[{"name":"Poonam Puri","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02001761562505067,"gpt":0.2558779002140311,"spread":0.2358602845889805,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007215614,0.0001391336,0.0002700924,0.00003075077,0.0003032605,0.00008636898,0.000249145,0.00006525502,0.00104088],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005728498,0.0001160322,0.0001759072,0.0001326598,0.0001698596,0.0001381961,0.00003652125,0.000195279,0.0008729355],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001125433,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00004510821,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00009876298,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002638933,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989823,0.00002045025,0.0003914876,0.0002753992,0.0001157726,0.000214568],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991676,0.00008656926,0.0001774506,0.0002881052,0.0002125441,0.00006773557],"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":[0.00000651576,0.00002274241,0.00009012732,0.00005305601,0.00001469292,6.247458e-7,0.00004053425,2.768963e-7,0.000001707854,0.9636827,0.03573954,0.000347467],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001092435,0.00001735246,0.006030838,0.0001309691,0.000004336599,0.000004906427,0.000027517,0.00001723768,0.000008076823,0.1843809,0.8091423,0.0001262878],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01922149,0.1473158,0.00001802156,0.02660938,0.001609592,0.0007505489,0.0003332078,0.00007804341,0.8040639],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9800815,0.01352439,0.00005891871,0.003409186,0.0002659874,0.00009476185,0.00001171986,0.00001871334,0.002534815],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.96086,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999905,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4385510024","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1428","title":"Equality before the Charter: Reflections on Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General)","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":11,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jurisprudence; Law; Supreme court; Charter; Sociology; Political science; Equal Protection Clause","authors":[{"name":"Carissima Mathen","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08100061302339426,"gpt":0.3664157798178432,"spread":0.2854151667944489,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00134467,0.00016459,0.0003092908,0.000006905002,0.004893999,0.00004575057,0.0005223745,0.000030796,0.0023111],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001948741,0.0001076897,0.0001598229,0.0003504585,0.0002289757,0.00009130535,0.0001670614,0.0003764843,0.00004240948],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001101325,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003074579,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.867503,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.976965,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9969879,0.001026539,0.0003079143,0.0002879122,0.0009791291,0.0004106275],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991562,0.0001041028,0.0001328711,0.0003459011,0.0001393736,0.0001215248],"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":[0.000005076218,0.00007610495,0.0006386648,0.0002490947,0.0001294614,0.000007480895,0.0065078,0.00001957276,0.000008196426,0.4924354,0.4966231,0.00330001],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006766631,0.00002928354,0.0005480858,0.0001013724,0.00005083834,5.563451e-7,0.001468082,0.000001626377,0.000002963583,0.0002806538,0.9973175,0.0001313645],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02024542,0.08502603,0.000006572361,0.5244471,0.004587428,0.004244647,0.0004731822,0.0003282889,0.3606413],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9059342,0.01414276,0.00005529496,0.06283828,0.001210312,0.0009331834,0.00006061774,0.00003124605,0.01479417],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8856887,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9986009,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1720456538","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1019","title":"The Rise of International Law in Canadian Constitutional Litigation: Fugue or Fusion?: Recent Developments and Challenges in Internalizing International Law","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"International Law and Aviation","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Political science; International law; Criminal law","authors":[{"name":"Louis Lebel","is_ca":false},{"name":"Gloria Chao","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08698436325994299,"gpt":0.3253423993917279,"spread":0.2383580361317849,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00150354,0.0001326852,0.0002060031,0.00008645085,0.0003162416,0.00008578187,0.0004614919,0.0000799143,0.0009817558],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003045435,0.0001078499,0.00004777426,0.0001604893,0.0007255873,0.0004377212,0.00007614495,0.0001695243,0.00002954897],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0006045139,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002628645,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.09090067,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8567549,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979976,0.0002190906,0.0006038811,0.000250368,0.000643349,0.0002856597],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989869,0.0001932489,0.0001802962,0.0001132348,0.000394311,0.0001320084],"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":[0.00001060486,0.0000396116,0.00160058,0.00006519726,0.00002529724,0.00001176773,0.0005367877,0.00000254766,0.000002710452,0.9880801,0.0002533752,0.009371364],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003101544,0.000009478883,0.0008629961,0.001932049,0.000006626413,0.000007985793,0.0001558101,0.00008756064,0.00001308575,0.005882348,0.9906067,0.0001251528],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.001601194,0.07133859,0.00001126613,0.09910304,0.001818051,0.0007457357,0.00007763191,0.00002352498,0.825281],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5983244,0.3986517,0.0001710091,0.001949991,0.0001579739,0.00005254238,0.00003328439,0.000006683937,0.0006523333],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9903534,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999315,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1604660447","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1226","title":"Equal Autonomy in Canadian Federalism: The Continuing Search for Balance in the Interpretation of the Division of Powers","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":10,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Jurisdiction; Law; Federalism; Political science; Supreme court; Exclusive jurisdiction; Federal jurisdiction; Autonomy; Constitution; Jurisprudence; Writ; Separation of powers; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Bruce Ryder","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04632363708824638,"gpt":0.3309071456951639,"spread":0.2845835086069176,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003497984,0.00005675987,0.0001683061,0.00002332345,0.0001308028,0.00001929611,0.0004091701,0.00003575224,0.00006778231],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001366443,0.00003080648,0.00008770951,0.0002281599,0.0001877193,0.0001044763,0.00002335191,0.000105067,9.069307e-7],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009441669,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002442015,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.4756603,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.7449682,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987496,0.00043897,0.0002956359,0.00009587872,0.0002185108,0.0002014775],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993833,0.0001924346,0.0001095441,0.0001834844,0.0001014096,0.00002978034],"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":[0.00002442999,0.00005968738,0.03536439,0.0006868751,0.00001865099,8.882988e-7,0.2065836,0.00001080917,0.00004798657,0.7091854,0.0004425815,0.04757465],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000464614,0.0001025927,0.06374194,0.007401763,0.00005454046,7.987232e-7,0.006056728,0.0008765988,0.0001262019,0.002311177,0.9186719,0.0001911592],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.5622852,0.05675262,0.0009851581,0.07344274,0.001571393,0.01365436,0.0001061314,0.00003898079,0.2911634],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9976715,0.001538508,0.00001978781,0.0006742377,0.00001722604,0.00003567381,0.000001891276,0.000003661886,0.00003746235],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9182293,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5278314,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2612725658","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1038","title":"“Reconciling Rights” the Supreme Court of Canada's Approach To Competing Charter Rights","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":8,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Charter; Political science; Law; Law and economics; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Frank Iacobucci","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03880812952687161,"gpt":0.2747366242445672,"spread":0.2359284947176956,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00189411,0.0001941519,0.0005199089,0.00001717442,0.00183764,0.00003372838,0.0004390872,0.00005050798,0.0003007964],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002353059,0.0001265466,0.0001429309,0.0003407513,0.0005209636,0.00009640209,0.00005153861,0.0001670549,0.00003311222],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001855816,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007012517,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5097148,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.757548,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9974793,0.0004187942,0.0004946879,0.0003013134,0.0008122271,0.0004936573],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988031,0.000220128,0.0001535604,0.0002629694,0.0003885312,0.000171655],"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":[0.00000230262,0.00003484575,0.0001727417,0.0001317708,0.00005528803,0.000002024226,0.0006731451,0.000006612659,0.000006933305,0.9861589,0.01260156,0.0001538659],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008328746,0.00001026542,0.0000853244,0.0007746335,0.00006986181,0.000003222221,0.000296511,0.000003774392,0.00004816418,0.006972115,0.9914608,0.000192069],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.002994609,0.04164075,0.0001479066,0.009490743,0.0006875272,0.001276377,0.00003337584,0.00004470698,0.943684],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9928006,0.002237256,0.0003570502,0.003725879,0.0002976237,0.00007413557,0.000006063732,0.000008923363,0.0004924675],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.989806,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994618,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1916264842","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1087","title":"Aboriginal Rights, Resource Development, and the Source of the Provincial Duty To Consult in Haida Nation and Taku River","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Indigenous Peoples' Rights and Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":8,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Statutory law; Jurisdiction; Law; Political science; Duty; Supreme court; Resource (disambiguation); Unit (ring theory); Geography; Archaeology","authors":[{"name":"Kent McNeil","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01375234229766403,"gpt":0.2743574931849103,"spread":0.2606051508872462,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001861309,0.0001159605,0.0002704755,0.00002223944,0.0009585675,0.00004882695,0.0002608022,0.00005901975,0.00005710211],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006606548,0.00005866768,0.00004045749,0.0002424341,0.0008557219,0.0001240615,0.00003917654,0.0001319366,0.00000967758],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009134103,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003163905,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01449238,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2385005,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984683,0.0003691743,0.0003321526,0.0001963443,0.0003842354,0.000249829],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993709,0.000139193,0.0001378326,0.0001661493,0.0001176987,0.00006820633],"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":[0.00003968618,0.00004989181,0.0009255332,0.0003007684,0.00001973635,0.000001193825,0.07346844,0.000002531347,0.000007977516,0.9072506,0.001816911,0.01611678],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003628747,0.000007857193,0.0005985685,0.0005262163,0.00002750884,0.00000227109,0.0001371515,0.000003682223,0.00006750084,0.0004682599,0.9976967,0.0001013866],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8290997,0.04572083,0.00007974602,0.03487258,0.0002266481,0.00555928,0.00002340941,0.00006195628,0.08435591],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9813616,0.00808293,0.0007990245,0.004953595,0.0003559806,0.00007997393,0.00000504744,0.00001713965,0.004344667],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9958798,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9920702,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1574723685","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1211","title":"Courting Constitutional Danger: Constitutional Conventions and the Legacy of the Patriation Reference","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Legal and Social Philosophy","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":8,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Justiciability; Supreme court; Law; Political question; Political science; Politics; Veto; Constitutional law; Constitutional court; Convention; Constitutional economics; Constitution; Judicial review; Power (physics); Law and economics; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Adam M. Dodek","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08771034750402737,"gpt":0.3139274568977658,"spread":0.2262171093937384,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001594135,0.00008664894,0.0002293532,0.000009847233,0.001161043,0.00003488378,0.000271026,0.00005854456,0.0003464953],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005276296,0.00005047171,0.0001431105,0.000185854,0.00967462,0.0002971333,0.00006875066,0.000165754,0.00001863499],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003814599,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004503151,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001652731,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0004125428,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984503,0.0005056057,0.0003480058,0.0001372146,0.0004106432,0.0001482377],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990432,0.0001895572,0.0002503236,0.0001622615,0.0003011406,0.00005348809],"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":[0.000006664425,0.00001980809,0.0003959566,0.00008830099,0.00002374366,2.749538e-7,0.0007543939,1.176543e-7,0.000004512045,0.998035,0.0003982245,0.0002730151],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007710963,0.00001285888,0.0009343513,0.001321179,0.0002896334,0.000004878574,0.0003076851,0.000005287383,0.00002033923,0.2306749,0.7654886,0.0001691394],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.00168481,0.04071927,0.0004429664,0.02487067,0.0008563535,0.001688851,0.00009013789,0.0000532563,0.9295937],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9915746,0.006542189,0.00008299812,0.001445648,0.0001672885,0.000032243,0.000007022972,0.000002179941,0.0001458445],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9898898,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9930205,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1609406408","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1135","title":"Voicing an Opinion: Authorship, Collaboration and the Judgments of Justice Bertha Wilson","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","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":true},"ca_institutions":"Université Laval; University of Victoria","funders":"","keywords":"Dissenting opinion; Supreme court; Economic Justice; Law; Portrait; Sociology; Political science; History","authors":[{"name":"Marie-Claire Belleau","is_ca":true},{"name":"Rebecca Johnson","is_ca":true},{"name":"Christina Vinters","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05517854406365819,"gpt":0.3505304650031502,"spread":0.295351920939492,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001646223,0.00009551375,0.0002714728,0.000001789854,0.001006224,0.00003388718,0.0002121935,0.00009700283,0.00009709622],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002290098,0.00006257933,0.0000711019,0.0003085572,0.0007720835,0.0003574815,0.00002933688,0.0001292831,0.000007775821],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003200317,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000108204,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0005968327,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001047502,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983878,0.0006060775,0.0002562819,0.0001666694,0.0004150599,0.0001681106],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992054,0.000114102,0.0001541596,0.0001967167,0.0002422352,0.00008741823],"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":[0.00002191719,0.00005710206,0.0002427685,0.0014843,0.00003944809,0.000001335902,0.04039265,0.000002695867,0.00002597381,0.9313603,0.0250965,0.00127498],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004171867,0.00003376135,0.0001146956,0.001294132,0.0001818075,0.000004282844,0.002955195,0.00001579223,0.00002405331,0.002589668,0.9922388,0.0001306171],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.03243804,0.745585,0.00009935002,0.09019822,0.002478725,0.004157163,0.00004996377,0.0002025891,0.124791],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.422765,0.5702868,0.0004123918,0.004737844,0.0005102269,0.00004374689,0.00002244587,0.00001219959,0.00120937],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9671423,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7739162,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2164840683","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1088","title":"Haida Nation and Taku River: A Commentary On Aboriginal Consultation and Reconciliation","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Assembly of First Nations","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Law; Obligation; Honour; Political science; Government (linguistics); Treaty; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"E. Ria Tzimas","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02247826241950664,"gpt":0.3336537329175343,"spread":0.3111754704980277,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001062153,0.00009325256,0.0001615754,0.0000329858,0.002035967,0.00004179304,0.00006002228,0.00006149888,0.00009579305],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00001347468,0.00008095549,0.00002136114,0.0001172916,0.0001719562,0.0003709587,6.663353e-7,0.00009132107,0.00003972893],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002187959,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001104581,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03805662,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.3677447,"domain_scores_codex":[0.99886,0.0002703402,0.0002414933,0.0001919868,0.0002489967,0.00018718],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993153,0.0001528416,0.0001296206,0.0000914056,0.0002038935,0.0001069138],"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":[0.00001357928,0.00009337463,0.0004967912,0.0006997019,0.00001583443,5.827919e-7,0.06694189,7.217729e-7,0.000002612254,0.9024107,0.006372265,0.02295192],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002152125,0.00004295474,0.0002658209,0.0005465213,0.0000337395,0.000001508462,0.0001934818,0.00001431907,0.00001514914,0.0007889505,0.997781,0.0001013522],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.4282842,0.159882,0.0001427407,0.1531569,0.001827515,0.006765288,0.00009161369,0.0002703434,0.2495794],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1783915,0.8087705,0.0008836063,0.009668652,0.0008740369,0.00001720223,0.0001015683,0.0000117183,0.001281156],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9914087,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992632,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3091653381","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1377","title":"The 2018 Pan-Canadian Securities Regulation Reference: Dualist Federalism to the Rescue of Cooperative Federalism","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Canadian Policy and Governance","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Federalism; Jurisdiction; Commerce Clause; Supreme court; Political science; Normative; Law; Interpretation (philosophy); Law and economics; Politics; Economics","authors":[{"name":"Johanne Poirier","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05956805710657967,"gpt":0.3174764434066724,"spread":0.2579083863000927,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009787056,0.0001482485,0.0002918508,0.00001276527,0.002102272,0.0002487768,0.0005844781,0.00007754748,0.0002299896],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007351729,0.00009807362,0.00009729083,0.0004729169,0.0005021128,0.0001888183,0.00004407946,0.0001891854,0.0001117341],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001736848,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008267898,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8552599,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9839596,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979332,0.0005290083,0.0004161657,0.000235303,0.0004679009,0.0004184177],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987065,0.0001676842,0.000138114,0.0003365146,0.0002883229,0.0003629192],"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":[0.000003747495,0.00000199295,0.000003249815,0.00007749622,0.00001092671,0.000001141532,0.004641748,0.000002520625,0.000004314625,0.5347176,0.4597046,0.0008306813],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007142955,0.00002743708,0.0003192597,0.0005449948,0.00002224577,9.482897e-7,0.0004571296,0.00000740031,0.00002092756,0.001347976,0.9970437,0.0001365985],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0007343643,0.03375009,0.000008257977,0.9024473,0.0002262637,0.001273461,0.0006363427,0.00002523661,0.06089866],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7891976,0.05083994,0.00002393093,0.151842,0.0007971363,0.0001055374,0.00003043545,0.00002297095,0.007140419],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7884632,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9991968,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1928956895","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1079","title":"Freedom of Expression and the Law of the Democratic Process","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Intellectual Property Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Democracy; Law; Jurisprudence; Parliament; Campaign finance; Context (archaeology); Political science; Politics; Judicial review; Law and economics; Constitutional law; Election law; Sociology; History","authors":[{"name":"Colin Feasby","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03038866156627423,"gpt":0.3035396905024319,"spread":0.2731510289361577,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001529289,0.00009396456,0.0003277,0.000005723557,0.0003714473,0.00001637632,0.0005323868,0.0000493739,0.000361595],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000581442,0.00004181654,0.0001080353,0.0001823368,0.001987419,0.000150225,0.00009082699,0.0001242822,0.000011047],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001835389,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008682228,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001131126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003008402,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983289,0.0005607146,0.0003610966,0.0001324691,0.000451833,0.0001650465],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989682,0.000267139,0.0001882623,0.0003190571,0.0002194207,0.00003795136],"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":[0.00003083313,0.00006321364,0.00003647502,0.002228001,0.00002612131,1.817133e-7,0.007733523,0.000008297482,0.0005711947,0.9776384,0.009248886,0.002414934],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006298879,0.000040378,0.0000112662,0.00887555,0.0001933436,0.000003338241,0.000468849,0.0001337461,0.008416826,0.01523308,0.965798,0.0001957361],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01094081,0.2302983,0.0000660403,0.04883073,0.0003242855,0.003956291,0.00001173633,0.00005547746,0.7055163],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9843431,0.01249358,0.0001245548,0.002199867,0.00009468324,0.00002686087,3.754561e-7,0.000008814627,0.0007081996],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9734023,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7322729,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2954057586","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1359","title":"Land Acknowledgment, Scripting and Julius Caesar","year":2019,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"York University; Canadian Mennonite University; University of Manitoba; Harvard University","keywords":"Honour; Oppression; Constitution; Presentation (obstetrics); Supreme court; Political science; Law; Sociology; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Jeffery Hewitt","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03932214584031214,"gpt":0.3122232192129267,"spread":0.2729010733726146,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005578084,0.00008626818,0.0002392577,0.000009521616,0.0004566147,0.00003582362,0.0001140649,0.0000329556,0.0005060551],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001122416,0.0000714534,0.00005218812,0.0001186948,0.0002807861,0.0001329658,0.00006878762,0.00007453214,0.0006641353],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003767118,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00007716815,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003706143,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004926474,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991419,0.00008289271,0.0001557021,0.0001741336,0.0002313855,0.0002140243],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996201,0.00005050833,0.0000495899,0.00009366294,0.0001117563,0.00007437803],"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":[0.000002917951,0.00002320016,0.02429015,0.000521269,0.00004143284,0.000003424082,0.0004112929,1.636329e-7,0.00002332767,0.9551632,0.01138145,0.008138178],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008903233,0.00001135673,0.0005292005,0.001459633,0.00003662844,0.000001102979,0.00007823126,7.451784e-7,0.000002458034,0.003235961,0.9944517,0.0001039493],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.008729127,0.3740868,0.000006366402,0.006153719,0.0005930125,0.0005731067,0.000007591413,0.00005915184,0.6097911],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7803915,0.2127746,0.00008862172,0.004347985,0.0004127442,0.00002376805,0.000004601472,0.000007993752,0.001948225],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9830703,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8536337,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1899518710","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1209","title":"The Patriation and Quebec Veto References: The Supreme Court Wrestles with the Political Part of the Constitution","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Constitution; Law; Supreme court; Veto; Parliament; Political science; Convention; Constitutional court; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Peter H. Russell","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07659455001087731,"gpt":0.2989832663319457,"spread":0.2223887163210684,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.001465606,0.0001321067,0.0002243313,0.000005883568,0.00246995,0.00005938291,0.000470147,0.00004995913,0.00006312972],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003714073,0.00004696791,0.00009376835,0.000217242,0.005714071,0.0001273734,0.00009839288,0.0001674127,0.00001283616],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005995786,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0004947318,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.07321461,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2682994,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9980624,0.0006009295,0.0002935425,0.0001700129,0.0005678211,0.0003052437],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986802,0.0004857773,0.0001783389,0.0002935538,0.00030332,0.00005886056],"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":[0.00001151567,0.00001438786,0.002180091,0.00003513571,0.00004171734,3.300075e-7,0.0005848682,1.42088e-7,0.000001611507,0.9934429,0.002618479,0.001068841],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001094285,0.00003499573,0.006465897,0.0008689638,0.000251884,0.000003590796,0.002675156,0.000001196585,0.00001932626,0.02843639,0.9610192,0.0001140092],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01993179,0.2067385,0.0001612018,0.3292083,0.001427087,0.00457738,0.0001033406,0.0001105976,0.4377418],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9742666,0.02334448,0.00001015002,0.001932423,0.0002072198,0.00007026092,0.000001898457,0.000003488188,0.0001634206],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9650065,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9988287,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2519228174","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1327","title":"Judging the Limits of Cooperative Federalism","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Adjudication; Constitution; Law; Charter; Interpretation (philosophy); Originalism; Constitutional law; Political science; Meaning (existential); Separation of powers; Treaty; Constitutional economics; Law and economics; Sociology; Epistemology; Philosophy; Linguistics","authors":[{"name":"Eric M. Adams","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07962996588047687,"gpt":0.3566823282573796,"spread":0.2770523623769027,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009955931,0.000125311,0.0003449964,0.000005171319,0.0009444552,0.00003539881,0.0003433579,0.00004507888,0.0004735571],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0007938492,0.0000540295,0.000138573,0.000165683,0.0007470506,0.0002173121,0.00006649025,0.00008063889,0.0001194101],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009680626,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005638369,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002604673,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003709694,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983804,0.0004629794,0.0002878931,0.0001751339,0.0004154016,0.0002782317],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.998837,0.0003893682,0.0001392485,0.0001840289,0.0003849416,0.00006543949],"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":[0.000005544613,0.00004459477,0.0006441532,0.0005106165,0.0001502623,0.000002699463,0.009675103,4.137375e-7,0.0008552888,0.9129862,0.05138898,0.02373615],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001164981,0.00001538874,0.0003498227,0.002194633,0.00005316877,4.43679e-7,0.0004303425,2.9178e-7,0.0002307062,0.0003609483,0.9961265,0.0001213052],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01449001,0.2937086,0.0001017993,0.4875707,0.0009580135,0.003269868,0.00004548074,0.0002064754,0.1996491],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8587472,0.1345588,0.00008602806,0.0034366,0.0002207888,0.00006111702,0.000001080373,0.00000988935,0.002878441],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9447375,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7264081,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1899114343","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1305","title":"The Constitutional Dimensions of Aboriginal Title","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Subject (documents); Law; Political science; Constitutional law; Constitutional right; Property (philosophy); Property rights; Sociology; Philosophy; Library science; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"Brian Slattery","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06174705072543573,"gpt":0.382995987188844,"spread":0.3212489364634082,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003629789,0.00002140226,0.00005086887,0.000002089968,0.0001711208,0.000008152278,0.0001001582,0.00001125767,0.0002225971],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004645244,0.00001223786,0.00002676051,0.00006557143,0.0004326222,0.00002557844,0.00001009401,0.00003189522,0.0004723239],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000168617,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002795302,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002489353,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0001832591,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9996508,0.00003064557,0.00007662527,0.00003936655,0.0001427275,0.00005982175],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996939,0.00003630659,0.00002738746,0.00009396069,0.0001031999,0.00004523807],"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":[1.434941e-7,0.000004228212,0.00001079815,0.000008491173,0.000001740544,7.59128e-8,0.00001670142,1.679411e-7,0.000001418099,0.9279412,0.07162446,0.0003906009],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001671564,0.000001861017,0.00000392389,0.0000693845,0.000008868637,3.320647e-7,0.00001293277,0.000001309826,0.000003021467,0.004468639,0.9953944,0.00001859965],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.00002733281,0.03124186,0.00009633557,0.008972378,0.0001574266,0.0001672662,0.00001162555,0.00001518434,0.9593106],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7744707,0.1873192,0.001611296,0.003827029,0.0007816592,0.000101829,0.00002538143,0.00001314531,0.03184979],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9274608,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6070925,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1605254849","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1249","title":"Parliamentary Engagement with the Charter: Rethinking the Idea of Legislative Rights Review","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Legislature; Charter; Political science; Legislation; Law; Bill of rights; Law and economics; Public administration; Human rights; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Janet L. Hiebert","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0621211467014886,"gpt":0.3215700139296023,"spread":0.2594488672281137,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003686808,0.0001329634,0.0003520955,0.000006027733,0.001474724,0.00001572603,0.0003694054,0.00002147525,0.000394211],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007111009,0.00005759516,0.0001282148,0.0002390777,0.00109626,0.0002202626,0.00008296248,0.000193063,0.00005084816],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005453083,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008222678,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007608226,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006850766,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9978589,0.0007733621,0.0002857943,0.0001323855,0.0006573637,0.0002921445],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990457,0.0002743949,0.0002155507,0.0002454795,0.0001649143,0.00005398422],"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":[0.000003048337,0.00003559812,0.0003323352,0.0006609078,0.0001460383,8.93704e-7,0.00490434,8.126374e-8,0.000001241653,0.9581317,0.03234817,0.003435637],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004560059,0.00001789976,0.0002153759,0.009022121,0.0003102205,0.000001240492,0.0003496555,6.598924e-8,0.000004904795,0.004524437,0.985415,0.00009340925],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001889454,0.7628871,0.0000291871,0.06615808,0.000192047,0.001313368,0.000007992187,0.0000221301,0.1692012],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.4948409,0.4858133,0.00005703579,0.01858931,0.0004002852,0.0001522627,0.00000474052,0.000005610231,0.0001364949],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9536073,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998252,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1648716606","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1098","title":"The Federal Principle and the 2005 Balance of Powers in Canada","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"Université Laval","funders":"","keywords":"Balance (ability); Political science; Psychology; Neuroscience","authors":[{"name":"Eugénie Brouillet","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01562008903553386,"gpt":0.2852168158331491,"spread":0.2695967267976152,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00111218,0.00008376106,0.0002629534,0.00000212851,0.0006650463,0.00003190244,0.0002324114,0.00001919627,0.00003796802],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002186535,0.00004046445,0.00004833513,0.0001048463,0.0006202898,0.00006342242,0.00005593691,0.00009746977,0.000002281562],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002736835,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002495312,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9752482,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9972724,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987045,0.000289671,0.0002700658,0.0001109711,0.0003500222,0.0002747792],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993489,0.0003144592,0.0001104157,0.0001204806,0.00007220556,0.00003349128],"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":[0.00002634506,0.0000263734,0.04932637,0.0006330129,0.00006157126,0.00000551368,0.001810353,0.00001313518,0.000008165117,0.865428,0.07977124,0.002889869],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002077472,0.000002019893,0.01103446,0.000308081,0.00001206716,3.094654e-7,0.0004407385,0.000007291925,0.000002504838,0.0003666805,0.9875512,0.00006685883],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.05916363,0.7125766,0.000001397216,0.1338877,0.0004160587,0.002157105,0.00001811979,0.00002314796,0.0917562],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9006218,0.09722438,0.00002302689,0.0009988119,0.00006729665,0.00003661396,0.000001150264,0.000004046924,0.001022907],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.90778,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5115066,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1546324725","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1077","title":"Religious Commitment and Identity: Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Windsor","funders":"","keywords":"Conscience; Charter; Law; Freedom of religion; Plaintiff; Identity (music); Sociology; Political science; Construct (python library); Human rights; Philosophy","authors":[{"name":"Richard Moon","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02568574303801228,"gpt":0.3362930668798159,"spread":0.3106073238418036,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005289907,0.0001217519,0.0002793784,0.00001680913,0.0005281386,0.00006523541,0.0002420947,0.0000475488,0.0003114849],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009766607,0.0001133524,0.00008260037,0.0001474309,0.001021714,0.0002867514,0.00006699158,0.0001166999,0.0003031112],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000119499,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003733513,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004726328,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01205415,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986071,0.0001713195,0.0002747523,0.0002021863,0.0004244543,0.0003202169],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992362,0.0001042213,0.0000969973,0.000219028,0.0001027908,0.0002408143],"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":[7.640754e-7,0.00002322051,0.0008131357,0.0001350148,0.00001565509,0.000004960762,0.00007354712,3.656746e-7,8.284437e-7,0.9745607,0.0218487,0.002523148],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007057692,0.00001461728,0.00009815653,0.0004924125,0.00007796574,0.00001113089,0.00003536368,7.482212e-7,0.000001463489,0.0009303572,0.9981272,0.0001400211],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.003657241,0.3709976,0.0002135946,0.05076133,0.0003131775,0.001041154,0.0000644118,0.0001851636,0.5727664],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7107938,0.2701475,0.0006705789,0.01641137,0.0004446385,0.00003140094,0.00001749336,0.00001062988,0.00147262],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9762785,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7144825,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3123265210","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1128","title":"The Charter of Whiteness: Twenty-Five Years of Maintaining Racial Injustice in the Canadian Criminal Justice System","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","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":"","keywords":"Injustice; Charter; Political science; Criminal justice; Economic Justice; Law; Racial profiling; Legislation; Government (linguistics); Critical race theory; Mass incarceration; Race (biology); Criminology; Racism; Sociology; Gender studies","authors":[{"name":"David M Tanovich","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05880741501285712,"gpt":0.3317094898789089,"spread":0.2729020748660517,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003532094,0.0001080707,0.0003318952,0.00003544669,0.0007997613,0.00003270583,0.0007220356,0.00006347055,0.00003740171],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0006807605,0.00007509729,0.0001108022,0.0003535972,0.0006932311,0.000157627,0.00003660271,0.0001928222,0.00002558663],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001701303,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006496226,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2916815,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6265938,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9976323,0.0006890069,0.0004821997,0.0001704741,0.0006320371,0.000393993],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9984914,0.0006003728,0.000210825,0.000316167,0.0002727189,0.0001085382],"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":[0.00003817123,0.00003937534,0.0004130881,0.005971566,0.00002630826,0.0001226628,0.0630922,0.00001065061,0.00001027559,0.9219251,0.0038361,0.004514506],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002392361,0.0001134089,0.003954835,0.01052807,0.001451,0.00006168387,0.076755,0.00003465071,0.00001035426,0.0002427451,0.9062873,0.0003217575],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3598327,0.2882259,0.0001187011,0.04833367,0.004225312,0.007203132,0.0001716012,0.0001243305,0.2917646],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9857181,0.01301547,0.00004099611,0.0009342547,0.0001719282,0.00002846931,0.000002241772,0.000007526388,0.00008100167],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9216824,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7130352,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1754226533","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1024","title":"Constitutional Casualties of September 11: Limiting the Legacy of the Anti-Terrorism Act","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","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":"","keywords":"Terrorism; Statute; Conviction; Law; Political science; Presumption; Presumption of innocence","authors":[{"name":"David M. Paciocco","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.098687175941766,"gpt":0.3428456381365486,"spread":0.2441584621947826,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001175646,0.0001005513,0.000293321,0.000006589679,0.000509995,0.00003014601,0.0004824001,0.00004373335,0.001169172],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004017739,0.00005708224,0.0002227231,0.0002082945,0.002226877,0.0002885874,0.00007953466,0.0001256986,0.00004155792],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002986436,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00009247372,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001691198,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001919014,"domain_scores_codex":[0.998387,0.000335203,0.0003880778,0.000134253,0.0005459395,0.0002095244],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988794,0.0003183112,0.0002493293,0.0003046737,0.0002057505,0.00004256687],"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":[0.000001480159,0.00005546388,0.004008313,0.001266711,0.00002884904,0.000002595876,0.001781029,0.000005355284,0.00007464246,0.9670125,0.02343336,0.002329757],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004924919,0.000009382782,0.0005321382,0.00303377,0.0001102954,0.000008229277,0.0004946663,0.000007611556,0.0001419479,0.0002504583,0.9952784,0.00008381031],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1146057,0.2602807,0.00003961024,0.06366384,0.001494525,0.00182603,0.00004353057,0.00006756204,0.5579785],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9838352,0.01450641,0.00003007625,0.0008678274,0.0001229305,0.000009069124,7.057154e-7,0.000003591471,0.0006241582],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9718451,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997439,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4385518157","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1001","title":"Equality: The Most Difficult Right","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Social Policy and Reform Studies","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":"","keywords":"Political science; Law and economics; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Beverley McLachlin","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06527068037599286,"gpt":0.3726214964129904,"spread":0.3073508160369975,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001357573,0.000131594,0.0003078805,0.000008274593,0.00183329,0.00005383264,0.0004056818,0.00007125095,0.0003713549],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003684216,0.00006878293,0.0001471718,0.0005512849,0.0007261353,0.0001298256,0.00007561234,0.0001569966,0.0002791899],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005752138,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008532193,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007268572,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01320003,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982682,0.0004105706,0.000278845,0.0001720836,0.000458925,0.0004113087],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992048,0.0001683024,0.00009942372,0.0002576957,0.0001754569,0.00009433149],"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":[0.000001814434,0.00003466992,0.0001761278,0.0001598015,0.00004798153,0.000004117266,0.002284301,9.020445e-8,0.000002062798,0.9389961,0.0506346,0.007658273],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006358114,0.000007655506,0.0002529406,0.0003887934,0.00006128965,0.000001659656,0.0004358951,3.348484e-7,0.000002426721,0.009850092,0.9888121,0.0001232014],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.0007032319,0.09906833,0.00001143583,0.162039,0.0005935731,0.0008722081,0.00001141114,0.0001499064,0.7365509],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1720565,0.7654938,0.00002265782,0.03924834,0.002750402,0.0001277183,0.00001049306,0.00002303881,0.02026699],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9381775,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994662,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1588999869","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1274","title":"The Arbitrariness in “Arbitrariness” (And Overbreadth and Gross Disproportionality): Principle and Democracy in Section 7 of the Charter","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Arbitrariness; Proportionality (law); Charter; Law; Democracy; Supreme court; Normative; Political science; Politics; Government (linguistics); Law and economics; Sociology; Epistemology","authors":[{"name":"Alana Klein","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01966685127228478,"gpt":0.2924388884956059,"spread":0.2727720372233211,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006861035,0.0000806403,0.0001933813,0.00001090793,0.0004713188,0.00003969701,0.00009292059,0.00003402062,0.00001980624],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001290033,0.00004594428,0.00002868158,0.0001951221,0.0009168676,0.000209576,0.0001032012,0.0001137453,0.000001335673],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002387529,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006364132,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0226389,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04145097,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990956,0.0001292696,0.0002661344,0.00014735,0.0002085228,0.0001531263],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996095,0.0001033097,0.00008574237,0.00008869677,0.0000789663,0.00003381083],"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":[0.000003609081,0.00002552878,0.2240883,0.0002245614,0.00001012171,5.171895e-7,0.0002607364,1.491354e-7,0.00001543313,0.7721812,0.00005878499,0.003131071],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001407669,0.000006187403,0.8559436,0.0007180736,0.00001856149,0.000003402849,0.0001123508,0.000005976305,0.00000476672,0.07179758,0.07116668,0.00008201947],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9080638,0.05165371,0.000003999229,0.02336289,0.0002211412,0.001217581,0.000005568832,0.00001160379,0.01545975],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9611278,0.03818247,0.000006342073,0.0004832467,0.00006217614,0.00006258721,7.630244e-7,0.000002503451,0.00007208378],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7003836,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9838694,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1511124634","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1168","title":"Narrowing Interjurisdictional Immunity","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Federalism; Law; Doctrine; Jurisdiction; Political science; Sovereign immunity; Qualified immunity; Legislation; Federal jurisdiction; Law and economics; Economics; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Peter W. Hogg","is_ca":false},{"name":"Rahat Godil","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06306659848464101,"gpt":0.3438547994370931,"spread":0.2807882009524521,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005892867,0.00007355248,0.0001579787,0.0000108256,0.001152311,0.00002047449,0.000292859,0.0000375341,0.001077561],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000761698,0.00006804721,0.0001197632,0.0001899496,0.0002850123,0.0002077953,0.00005744811,0.0001577283,0.0003903235],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007153671,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001416948,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002457589,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0006766107,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990401,0.0001414579,0.0002115134,0.0001349305,0.0002796514,0.0001923502],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994469,0.00005435246,0.000055444,0.0002315594,0.0001119687,0.000099829],"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":[0.000001222251,0.00005789701,0.0003702892,0.0001342863,0.00001633722,0.000003511351,0.001094839,8.094196e-7,0.0000395961,0.9735213,0.02317416,0.001585744],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004289563,0.00000534235,0.0003250047,0.0003296041,0.00001366189,0.000005697456,0.00004624521,0.000002348204,0.00001138259,0.001038156,0.9980966,0.00008309423],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01248581,0.06954778,0.0004662289,0.03425819,0.0004283378,0.0009905221,0.00002727182,0.0003172189,0.8814787],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9353746,0.05780042,0.0003665658,0.003943249,0.000303945,0.00006594897,0.00001686837,0.00001052897,0.002117901],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9749224,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998356,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1755290261","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1257","title":"“Dollars Versus [Equality] Rights”: Money and the Limits on Distributive Justice","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Victoria","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Distributive justice; Political science; Plaintiff; Law and economics; Supreme court; Adjudication; Government (linguistics); Social rights; Economics; Economic Justice; Law; Public economics; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Hester Lessard","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08993198609582952,"gpt":0.3613987024357866,"spread":0.2714667163399571,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001629715,0.0001219447,0.0002925089,0.000006031977,0.001587158,0.00003367325,0.000172025,0.00004526109,0.00008516448],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0006807346,0.0000724418,0.00009457782,0.0001751667,0.001447034,0.0001588733,0.00005527611,0.0001271025,0.0001653949],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007003794,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005348075,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004022208,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00239557,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984392,0.0004650091,0.000196096,0.0001484625,0.0004222401,0.0003290232],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987943,0.0007344667,0.00008146958,0.000136851,0.0001259906,0.0001269762],"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":[0.0000524772,0.0000269589,0.00006176562,0.000065444,0.00004472237,5.279636e-7,0.000510553,9.474002e-8,2.695052e-7,0.9944561,0.00395144,0.000829707],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004156772,0.00001946439,0.0002849506,0.0004583902,0.0003897185,5.546997e-7,0.0002884867,3.509089e-7,0.000003746924,0.0111035,0.9869133,0.0001218124],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.002232307,0.3110446,0.00004569811,0.03580315,0.001638684,0.0009868302,0.00006778297,0.00006865845,0.6481122],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.915212,0.08104095,0.00001767389,0.00294009,0.0005892778,0.000044191,0.000006642468,0.000003549072,0.000145657],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9833525,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9997126,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1519182674","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1074","title":"Reversal of Fortune: Litigating Health Care Reform in Auton v. British Columbia","year":2005,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues","field":"Health Professions","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Constitutionality; Legal guardian; Supreme court; Political science; Law; Public administration; Health care; Guardian","authors":[{"name":"Christopher P. Manfredi","is_ca":true},{"name":"Antonia Maioni","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04945784528826,"gpt":0.420908958683877,"spread":0.371451113395617,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003082394,0.0001278222,0.0008881176,0.00001816938,0.000314281,0.00001586242,0.0002461515,0.0001692977,0.00365641],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001313082,0.0001578096,0.0001223111,0.0002635047,0.0001130175,0.0003027096,0.0001178202,0.0008655346,0.0001193217],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0007856826,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007881407,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1821018,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4952649,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9961067,0.0008740433,0.001596985,0.0003408132,0.000462412,0.0006190657],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980021,0.0003787144,0.0005605255,0.0005073604,0.0002786783,0.0002726385],"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":[0.00003503367,0.0005073401,0.06988516,0.2977403,0.00005590314,0.00003828476,0.009339779,9.360181e-7,0.00001498533,0.01740979,0.354935,0.2500375],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0005582625,0.000101601,0.004223209,0.04445598,0.00003118769,0.000004029122,0.001900907,0.000005539301,0.000001635925,0.0001080904,0.9484652,0.0001443392],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1721605,0.5046277,0.00001750708,0.1863739,0.001077363,0.008817522,0.0002479232,0.0003223961,0.1263552],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7904181,0.1385531,0.004594412,0.06145288,0.0009226241,0.0004610225,0.0002496121,0.00007912716,0.003269115],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6182576,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9972544,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1812980385","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1243","title":"The Impact of the Charter on the Law of Sexual Assault: Plus Ça Change, Plus C’est La Même Chose","year":2012,"lang":"fr","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Law; Legislation; Supreme court; Sexual assault; Political science; Sexual violence; Dignity; Autonomy; Criminal code; Criminology; Sociology; Criminal law; Psychology; Poison control; Suicide prevention; Medicine","authors":[{"name":"Martha Shaffer","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1139827211992892,"gpt":0.384400399880327,"spread":0.2704176786810379,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004045656,0.0003595344,0.0007402506,0.00001509555,0.00118336,0.00006328231,0.0008907178,0.0001932168,0.0006958642],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003959802,0.0001597095,0.0003840068,0.0007112358,0.002230993,0.0003607785,0.0002282487,0.0004406165,0.0001762254],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002121876,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002023885,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008431317,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002956446,"domain_scores_codex":[0.995608,0.001746022,0.000676276,0.000257244,0.001028588,0.0006839203],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9966686,0.001316744,0.0006277349,0.000782793,0.0004618773,0.000142192],"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":[0.00004177315,0.0003622208,0.001304515,0.001172107,0.0005441791,8.673155e-7,0.02639466,0.00001826563,0.0000257538,0.8937424,0.06174317,0.01465008],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002846845,0.000158576,0.002373494,0.001856717,0.0003554311,0.000003386366,0.002108881,0.00005319936,0.00003079173,0.0002767491,0.9922581,0.0002399911],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0111104,0.708281,0.00001700799,0.0988425,0.004051364,0.003942161,0.0002969806,0.00005735759,0.1734012],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8852994,0.1014544,0.00001039467,0.004198886,0.001439121,0.0001804042,0.000008250387,0.0000407862,0.007368369],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9305149,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9981716,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1599077220","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1223","title":"Contractual and Covenantal Conceptions of Modern Treaty Interpretation","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Ombudsman and Human Rights","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Interpretation (philosophy); Treaty; Negotiation; Supreme court; Law; Covenant; Sociology; Political science; Law and economics; Philosophy","authors":[{"name":"Dwight Newman","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05609932130275677,"gpt":0.3180383364535931,"spread":0.2619390151508364,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003132821,0.00007566313,0.0002401334,0.00001478905,0.0001695233,0.00001334871,0.0001081347,0.00004230671,0.001068897],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003303353,0.00005997974,0.00006980124,0.00004211943,0.0005170685,0.0002098926,0.00001515496,0.00005797714,0.00003450198],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00002170823,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005070589,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0007423966,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003811025,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992329,0.0001293899,0.0002219556,0.0001288321,0.0001539757,0.000132932],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99957,0.00004850945,0.00009864025,0.0001142505,0.00009103314,0.00007753644],"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":[0.0000136783,0.00007752545,0.0002686559,0.0003225566,0.00002855981,0.000002342363,0.01880045,4.207355e-8,0.00004839231,0.9604959,0.0006664791,0.01927535],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001433083,0.0004115755,0.005730774,0.007316839,0.0007390641,0.00001372435,0.001445742,0.0001519746,0.0003868713,0.1607659,0.8208066,0.0007978431],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.184221,0.1243486,0.001127938,0.0009994244,0.0005000013,0.002061105,0.00009440912,0.0001713926,0.6864761],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9844432,0.01465409,0.0001246102,0.0003352782,0.00003857079,0.000009768333,0.000006041094,0.00000460291,0.0003838516],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8201401,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998443,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1609483509","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1187","title":"Section 1, Constitutional Reasoning and Cultural Difference: Assessing the Impacts of Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony","year":2010,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Adjudication; Charter; Jurisprudence; Supreme court; Law; Constitutionalism; Irony; Political science; Constitutional law; Section (typography); Economic Justice; Sociology; Epistemology; Law and economics; Philosophy; Computer science; Democracy","authors":[{"name":"Benjamin L. Berger","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03126204350353062,"gpt":0.3525673312348134,"spread":0.3213052877312828,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00082089,0.0001273044,0.0003603598,0.000008115037,0.0007487271,0.00006975362,0.0001765957,0.00009355417,0.0001153156],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0009921759,0.00007482456,0.00009053828,0.0001511103,0.002461728,0.0003086405,0.00006757021,0.0002302103,0.000001772888],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004936624,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001044745,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02305612,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02630671,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987151,0.0002452708,0.0003108433,0.0001627428,0.0003563979,0.0002096629],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989105,0.0002924849,0.0002837941,0.0001246998,0.0003128168,0.00007570058],"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":[0.00001935112,0.0001207365,0.09365119,0.002681504,0.000275451,0.000001946942,0.02462651,0.000001023603,0.04287614,0.822558,0.005743362,0.007444815],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008324999,0.0001193686,0.2404081,0.01060918,0.0006234269,0.00003665825,0.004759276,0.00003972419,0.001346433,0.001120309,0.7393891,0.0007158688],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9529974,0.0173901,0.00001193765,0.008422392,0.000643861,0.0007440111,0.00001353306,0.00002458752,0.01975217],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9916168,0.007562527,0.0002324418,0.000220015,0.0001845392,0.00001491802,0.000006925839,0.000003667453,0.000158197],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8214377,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9914607,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1960694789","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1174","title":"When Secret Intelligence Becomes Evidence: Some Implications of Khadr and Charkaoui II","year":2009,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Secrecy; Intelligence analysis; Statutory interpretation; Law; Supreme court; Statutory law; Context (archaeology); Political science; Intelligence cycle; Psychology; Judicial interpretation; Law and economics; Sociology; Military intelligence; History","authors":[{"name":"Kent Roach","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1033545586183929,"gpt":0.3914586230328093,"spread":0.2881040644144163,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001436244,0.0001474673,0.0004137674,0.00002911831,0.0005116526,0.00004499509,0.0005120665,0.00006870936,0.000646679],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0004548234,0.0001314309,0.0001188511,0.0002181897,0.0004272506,0.0007195644,0.00008680148,0.0001277739,0.00003533849],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004972005,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001294789,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001495083,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001409164,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983828,0.0001715898,0.0004571609,0.0003081622,0.0003702465,0.0003100214],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9987747,0.0002309013,0.0001769431,0.0004019938,0.000236085,0.0001793869],"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":[0.000004038341,0.00003940506,0.0005180531,0.0007693337,0.00000910002,0.000001102224,0.001471712,1.875318e-7,0.0001216737,0.9540541,0.01181897,0.0311924],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004670036,0.0002013657,0.003639326,0.01084146,0.0001948917,0.00001111936,0.0002509691,0.000003872319,0.0001918644,0.1292184,0.8550594,0.000340716],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.007825604,0.6839316,0.0003080244,0.2771716,0.0002871909,0.001736988,0.00003147416,0.0001505263,0.02855692],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6672772,0.328269,0.0003781221,0.003316006,0.0001126436,0.00002304267,0.00000411348,0.000006042319,0.0006138262],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8432404,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.7080681,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1882354232","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1278","title":"The (Re)Discovery of the Proportionality Principle in Sentencing in Ipeelee: Constitutionalization and the Emergence of Collective Responsibility","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","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":"University of Ottawa","funders":"","keywords":"Proportionality (law); Charter; Supreme court; State responsibility; Political science; Law; State (computer science); Economic Justice; Law and economics; Sociology; Computer science; Human rights; Algorithm","authors":[{"name":"Marie-Ève Sylvestre","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02878928957916958,"gpt":0.3352638882078174,"spread":0.3064745986286478,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005576547,0.00007616486,0.0002537111,0.00001340436,0.0003354494,0.00002387689,0.0003360196,0.00003989244,0.00008546856],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00490179,0.00003792596,0.00007194073,0.0007079756,0.00274761,0.0002775659,0.0001296463,0.0001352543,0.000001822469],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001252756,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0007428074,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01016585,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01963362,"domain_scores_codex":[0.996949,0.001592763,0.00060215,0.0001728106,0.0005262182,0.0001570799],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982172,0.0007186552,0.0003149764,0.0003227138,0.0004043623,0.0000220924],"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":[0.00003903292,0.00004756848,0.06093513,0.0003367371,0.00001231582,2.451906e-7,0.007432842,0.00002300908,0.00003109263,0.9306613,0.0003356326,0.0001451541],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002646331,0.00007527183,0.3477778,0.01040014,0.0002149284,0.000003850791,0.01419425,0.0007367684,0.0008364129,0.3078209,0.3146095,0.0006837848],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6422361,0.2008669,0.000267522,0.04552618,0.0008972136,0.0167259,0.00007919341,0.00003621248,0.09336485],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9942979,0.005049296,0.00004530425,0.0001930981,0.00001544442,0.0001093004,0.00000100041,0.000002588344,0.0002860624],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6228403,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999663,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1746578005","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1289","title":"Reconsidering Reconciliation: The Long Game","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Sovereignty; Jurisprudence; Law; Constitution; Supreme court; Treaty; Honour; Sociology; Treaty of Waitangi; Colonialism; Jurisdiction; Economic Justice; Political science; Premise; Politics; Epistemology","authors":[{"name":"Jeffery Hewitt","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06540845763291948,"gpt":0.3244463631188702,"spread":0.2590379054859507,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00376777,0.0001034065,0.000229939,0.00001469095,0.003543507,0.0000656129,0.0002944642,0.00006885223,0.0009546431],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005686997,0.00006735881,0.00009229851,0.0001841724,0.000216351,0.0002007397,0.000001744052,0.0001500194,0.0004819136],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001308527,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002509877,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01500816,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.6961617,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9980721,0.0007109308,0.0003467198,0.0002039947,0.0003014505,0.0003647303],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988198,0.0002959133,0.0001555481,0.0003720972,0.0002350769,0.000121539],"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":[0.000001207549,0.0000263132,0.0002417463,0.0008618683,0.00001519644,7.034079e-7,0.04873237,9.298079e-7,2.8145e-7,0.9383633,0.003706699,0.008049386],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00004054472,0.00001117551,0.00009795885,0.0007625937,0.00002740696,0.000003530854,0.0001517481,0.000003178483,0.000009738776,0.002795994,0.9959902,0.0001059995],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.01042751,0.08595024,0.0002618516,0.02898866,0.002897394,0.002102774,0.000003115914,0.0001849833,0.8691835],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1940944,0.7744306,0.0003349295,0.007762337,0.003011245,0.00003231843,0.0000160714,0.00003271187,0.0202854],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9922834,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999586,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1780258276","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1095","title":"Right Theory, Wrong Reasons: Dynamic Interpretation, the Charter and “Fundamental Laws”","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","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":"Western University","funders":"","keywords":"Section (typography); Jurisprudence; Law; Charter; Meaning (existential); Interpretation (philosophy); Epistemology; Adjudication; CLARITY; Surprise; Doctrine; Sociology; Political science; Philosophy; Linguistics; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"Randal N. M. Graham","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01085061491488946,"gpt":0.2856094916406576,"spread":0.2747588767257682,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008461165,0.0001049756,0.0001863188,0.000008743189,0.001049409,0.00006751214,0.0001650349,0.00003029749,0.0003485096],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006207601,0.00006649767,0.0000760585,0.0001104322,0.001117017,0.0001586292,0.00005052811,0.00008270578,0.00008067396],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006296283,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005263855,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.003109687,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01504939,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989122,0.0002610797,0.0001997376,0.000170132,0.0002599598,0.0001968774],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995585,0.000143626,0.00006817168,0.000111658,0.00008022016,0.00003781209],"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":[0.000003106872,0.000015029,0.0004037532,0.00004137271,0.00002039076,0.000001588706,0.0002265503,9.878607e-8,0.000002894546,0.9932931,0.003275522,0.002716607],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006855668,0.00001005256,0.00178165,0.0007957476,0.00008140822,0.00000357462,0.0002201459,0.000005151712,0.00000116799,0.1276058,0.8693155,0.00011121],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.003285119,0.4296579,0.0003556099,0.04708089,0.0005209463,0.001168846,0.00003149129,0.0001114682,0.5177878],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9651098,0.03056207,0.00002804321,0.003164056,0.0001631655,0.00005614496,0.00001095694,0.00000530202,0.0009004493],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9618247,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8397912,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2936949072","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1329","title":"The Promise and Limits of Cooperative Federalism as a Constitutional Principle","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Political Systems and Governance","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Federalism; Cooperative federalism; Dual federalism; Jurisprudence; Supreme court; Sovereignty; Political science; Separation of powers; Law and economics; Constitution; Politics; Law; Doctrine; New Federalism; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Warren J. Newman","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04383165941633847,"gpt":0.3442532838732444,"spread":0.300421624456906,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007457658,0.0000659324,0.0001872966,0.0000024399,0.0004526585,0.00003041225,0.000134706,0.0000324346,0.0001078716],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001068542,0.0000316863,0.00004397625,0.00005226515,0.001622001,0.0001139773,0.00002913646,0.00003723643,0.00004196608],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004440498,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002888674,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001796674,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001377543,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989929,0.0001969886,0.0002137255,0.000122558,0.0002779447,0.0001958928],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991578,0.0003477969,0.00009189518,0.0001197859,0.0001769274,0.0001058112],"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":[0.000002504165,0.000008372217,0.0001055659,0.0001037428,0.000009144539,8.390685e-7,0.00006489109,9.848938e-9,0.00004149284,0.9974495,0.00118911,0.001024849],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001150947,0.00001794134,0.0001450371,0.002335287,0.00001101149,0.000002946397,0.000008361155,2.902535e-7,0.00006768591,0.006953827,0.9902849,0.00005759894],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01866794,0.277891,0.0006341508,0.1312721,0.0007310379,0.003795201,0.0002281703,0.00008213251,0.5666983],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9111913,0.07942025,0.00008709948,0.00174979,0.0001631302,0.00007536501,6.379616e-7,0.000004655083,0.007307733],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9904956,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.597633,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1605145486","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1271","title":"Hate Speech and the Reasonable Supreme Court of Canada","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection","field":"Computer Science","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Constitutionality; Supreme court; Law; Hatred; Human rights; Political science; Legislation; Commission; Harm; Fundamental rights; Tribunal; Sociology; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Mark J. Freiman","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01132392969520008,"gpt":0.215569236149523,"spread":0.2042453064543229,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00105202,0.0001956244,0.0004685617,0.00001950278,0.0002075327,0.0001154206,0.0007534007,0.0000479423,0.0002119798],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001144915,0.0001286421,0.00008929392,0.0002985994,0.0001600309,0.0003979953,0.0002095567,0.000178904,0.00005654091],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005603149,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002452623,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.245246,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06777877,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981223,0.0002026315,0.0004263305,0.0003460724,0.0005144551,0.0003881613],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9983916,0.0001310514,0.0001805927,0.0008472889,0.0002968626,0.0001526311],"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":[0.00002977552,0.00009645108,0.0002775906,0.004622343,0.0002378246,0.00005470862,0.000223441,0.00001502148,0.001172287,0.4673904,0.3815765,0.1443036],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000795154,0.00006722276,0.0002846724,0.002055743,0.00007655111,0.0001776813,0.00001722141,0.002850949,0.002795837,0.006895915,0.9835984,0.0003846742],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.03442541,0.5456303,0.01975089,0.1989799,0.004431118,0.0129604,0.00006806492,0.0008385248,0.1829154],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8465633,0.1056768,0.01856423,0.01855866,0.0003525541,0.0004449412,0.00002190193,0.00009118817,0.009726357],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.812138,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9492319,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1484087257","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1110","title":"Twenty-Five Years in Search of a Reasonable Approach","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Charter; Legislature; Scope (computer science); Code (set theory); Criminal code; Law; Criminal procedure; Political science; Section (typography); Law and economics; Criminal law; Computer science; Sociology; Programming language","authors":[{"name":"Michal Fairburn","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.08967049957305391,"gpt":0.3508277943113572,"spread":0.2611572947383033,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001620066,0.0000840029,0.0003459364,0.0000288311,0.0001418852,0.00001025325,0.0003535374,0.00005468966,0.0002859527],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000188504,0.00008075278,0.0001031456,0.0004231791,0.0004274539,0.0002012382,0.00006146085,0.0001466208,0.00008592197],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007368842,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002259749,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01964984,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001759204,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983196,0.0003063085,0.0002821663,0.0002190279,0.0005516111,0.0003213035],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993769,0.00009293708,0.00006140635,0.0002440622,0.0001234699,0.0001012237],"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":[0.00004922133,0.0006107196,0.009991199,0.006924433,0.00004213723,0.0001558018,0.01761218,0.00002659702,0.00008224542,0.8988433,0.05428835,0.01137385],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001450749,0.00003534383,0.001905058,0.002736452,0.00003088903,0.00001153305,0.0005833405,0.00001342991,0.00002150838,0.0004504883,0.9938981,0.0001687916],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1238784,0.2850095,0.00007118125,0.007639276,0.0002623126,0.00242802,0.00002005277,0.0001033044,0.580588],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8577455,0.1382939,0.0008788687,0.0005207249,0.00007768947,0.00003309031,0.000005565229,0.00001116271,0.002433554],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9396098,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9868784,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1863931487","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1124","title":"Moral Judgment, Criminal Law and the Constitutional Protection of Religion","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"American Constitutional Law and Politics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"York University","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Criminal law; Political science; Constitutionality; Comparative law; Supreme court; Constitutional law; Theory of criminal justice; Criminal justice; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Benjamin L. Berger","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06175518712550752,"gpt":0.3115141845506743,"spread":0.2497589974251668,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006405193,0.00008589434,0.0002418056,0.00001009684,0.0008391992,0.00001204226,0.000118287,0.00003938608,0.00008894999],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000128085,0.00006067763,0.00009131761,0.0001057199,0.01259679,0.0001383139,0.00002824316,0.0001078659,0.00001518327],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004506912,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0005848701,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01117802,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0005843036,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988284,0.0002594881,0.0002570856,0.0001288663,0.0003579242,0.0001682963],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.99939,0.000104949,0.0001247336,0.0001247283,0.0001821324,0.00007342637],"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":[0.00001405045,0.00001523996,0.0000445864,0.0001691967,0.00001111724,0.000002087839,0.00009749726,9.467172e-7,0.000003800692,0.9979309,0.001630046,0.00008057206],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002512674,0.0000222155,0.00001680025,0.0004665443,0.0000853995,0.00005215494,0.00003147895,0.000002656692,0.00001658776,0.00766021,0.9913125,0.00008218066],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0009977351,0.05066831,0.0007967268,0.01189874,0.0002762925,0.001222183,0.00003748976,0.00004764786,0.9340549],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9543744,0.03940224,0.0002117587,0.005413233,0.0001590376,0.00004362599,0.000006490733,0.000003010745,0.0003861746],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9902707,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9954066,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3121144733","doi":"10.60082/2563-8505.1385","title":"One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? Substantive Equality, Systemic Discrimination and Pay Equity at the Supreme Court of Canada","year":2020,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Supreme Court law review","topic":"Discrimination and Equality Law","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":4,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Supreme court; Law; Charter; Political science; Employment discrimination; Equity (law); Jurisprudence","authors":[{"name":"Fay Faraday","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.1104818675657516,"gpt":0.3617591152709422,"spread":0.2512772477051906,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003625219,0.0002420304,0.000723596,0.00001685913,0.0006286129,0.00009740982,0.000595113,0.00007757959,0.0007770511],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005240708,0.0001752848,0.0001544309,0.0003708658,0.0006146749,0.0003540415,0.0003650888,0.00019972,0.00004005316],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000446356,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006505976,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2675541,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8444945,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9952682,0.00138045,0.0008632233,0.0004419239,0.001529109,0.0005171438],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.997883,0.0003722245,0.0004652037,0.0003990404,0.0005295514,0.0003510061],"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":[0.00003621142,0.00006732012,0.0007315792,0.006926243,0.0001096305,0.000002953555,0.006791785,0.000002438688,0.0001829217,0.9632446,0.01598906,0.005915303],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001363719,0.0001559268,0.001523477,0.00654721,0.0008753869,0.00000533088,0.007213972,0.0001251563,0.0004715448,0.003870658,0.9769301,0.0009175317],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.05385073,0.07248709,0.002512287,0.3256772,0.001711492,0.0103837,0.001631016,0.0002796733,0.5314668],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9836615,0.009920546,0.00005423079,0.004920761,0.0001274734,0.00003836815,0.0000650815,0.00002256625,0.001189465],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.960941,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8508165,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}