{"meta":{"page":1,"per_page":50,"max_per_page":100,"total":35,"total_is_capped":false,"direct_labels_cover":0,"predictions_cover":35,"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":"45f0242869ec","filters":{"venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal"}},"results":[{"id":"W2157653217","doi":"10.1017/s0008197303006457","title":"Interceptive Subtraction, Unjust Enrichment and Wrongs—A Reply to Professor Birks","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":73,"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":"Unjust enrichment; Plaintiff; Restitution; Law; Wrongdoing; Obligation; Political science; Law and economics; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"Mitchell McInnes","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02676736807740026,"gpt":0.3219218934099887,"spread":0.2951545253325884,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0131295,0.0008552219,0.001805171,0.001386939,0.006471606,0.008338802,0.004303908,0.04597166,0.005521954],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02914527,0.0008860653,0.001422209,0.001622081,0.03217481,0.02466108,0.004791318,0.059729,0.002120969],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01100171,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01151523,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03070277,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04048521,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9927699,0.002809001,0.0004445423,0.001276973,0.001889208,0.0008104679],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.976346,0.01917994,0.0006068838,0.00053613,0.002051284,0.001279819],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002827396,0.00002052236,0.0001581412,0.00006560997,0.00001016686,0.0001645456,0.0008099154,0.0001171231,0.00004889133,0.1475058,0.8437675,0.007303539],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006040798,0.00003217516,0.000628564,0.0006403989,0.00001898332,0.0004409037,0.002355627,0.0003528158,0.0001554469,0.1982017,0.7970009,0.0001120047],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","genre_scores_codex":[0.0001593862,0.007932646,0.0001047222,0.987241,0.003336414,0.000001252182,0.00000783705,0.000006146452,0.001210544],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.01253039,0.01126105,0.0003655243,0.9479049,0.02088738,0.00001975442,0.00001262846,0.00004479831,0.006973536],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","teacher_disagreement_score":0.04597166,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07982332,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2128352995","doi":"10.1017/s000819730600715x","title":"A RE-APPRAISAL OF THE FIDUCIARY SELF-DEALING AND FAIR-DEALING RULES","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":38,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Beneficiary; Fiduciary; Database transaction; Law and economics; Business; Trust law; Settlor; Property (philosophy); Law; Economics; Actuarial science; Political science; Finance; Computer science; Philosophy; Database","authors":[{"name":"Matthew Conaglen","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01555527277765088,"gpt":0.2916567480682056,"spread":0.2761014752905547,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03446482,0.0007266101,0.001264661,0.002433951,0.008267656,0.01344642,0.005604788,0.01687136,0.003288683],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06633442,0.0007872487,0.001907874,0.001590369,0.04310589,0.01907928,0.006580005,0.03228775,0.0009079397],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009949581,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01595372,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02950422,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02141221,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9582388,0.01105301,0.002783115,0.005028863,0.01890238,0.003993737],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9629285,0.02180403,0.001745401,0.004710565,0.007491795,0.001319701],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000004777333,0.000005129463,0.00005602663,0.00001311277,0.000002253059,0.00002509404,0.0004705377,0.00006702869,0.0000138984,0.9918131,0.00573829,0.001790955],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001925355,0.00002237903,0.0005865745,0.000396918,0.00001635303,0.0001049149,0.0009247141,0.000822666,0.0002114707,0.8478202,0.1490349,0.00003976529],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02306691,0.02283699,0.04481103,0.3250843,0.008029734,0.0001732261,0.0002509488,0.0001058584,0.575641],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7436791,0.01006589,0.02101405,0.1500349,0.01069861,0.0005400953,0.0001903704,0.0002604758,0.06351658],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03446482,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1822696,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2072498805","doi":"10.1017/s000819731300038x","title":"CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS AND THE NO-PROFIT RULE","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":38,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Constructive trust; Constructive; Business; Law and economics; Profit (economics); Economics; Microeconomics; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"Lionel Smith","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01048198519934603,"gpt":0.2585663839237788,"spread":0.2480843987244328,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01287962,0.00052208,0.001275764,0.001086357,0.004908987,0.009675419,0.002149238,0.008690282,0.006098019],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03596672,0.0006454558,0.001089,0.0008654526,0.02701926,0.01248347,0.00445281,0.009400544,0.001141062],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004848933,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004673455,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00327384,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002872714,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9873768,0.004871467,0.000618449,0.002015886,0.003421756,0.001695668],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9702052,0.01914429,0.002285017,0.004356537,0.002957824,0.001051023],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000003388136,0.000003877148,0.00002538048,0.000004653722,0.000002355238,0.00001609475,0.00007259549,0.00008158838,0.00001459931,0.9988243,0.0004495692,0.0005016111],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000006615087,0.000002083414,0.00002782194,0.000005821599,0.000002101732,0.00001317986,0.00002737078,0.0002236286,0.00002535072,0.9981045,0.001558543,0.000002888237],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.06617557,0.004015703,0.1149315,0.06186718,0.0009139618,0.0001302133,0.0001485313,0.0001131027,0.7517043],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9651747,0.000703022,0.005283598,0.002969616,0.0006076447,0.0001259087,0.00002410156,0.00003829143,0.0250732],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01287962,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0681147,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W3199187393","doi":"10.1017/s0008197321000775","title":"MAKING SENSE OF MESNE PROFITS: REMEDIES","year":2021,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":34,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Restitution; Unjust enrichment; Damages; Tort; Duty; Breach of contract; Law; Debt; Business; Law and economics; Economics; Political science; Liability; Finance","authors":[{"name":"Charles Mitchell","is_ca":true},{"name":"Luke Rostill","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.07136537914229837,"gpt":0.3619567587059496,"spread":0.2905913795636512,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01049384,0.0006207701,0.0007571653,0.002686434,0.005545987,0.009611132,0.002343206,0.008921648,0.00771432],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02610916,0.0004186346,0.0006072451,0.000880545,0.03271688,0.007445807,0.008958329,0.007530145,0.0007558146],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004389414,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003971244,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002191912,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00396783,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9809273,0.005795366,0.001175553,0.001908862,0.008030962,0.002161977],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9859223,0.007548763,0.001634536,0.001610057,0.002465814,0.00081857],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00002146412,0.00008308041,0.0009825793,0.00005574271,0.00001612442,0.0007308158,0.004121071,0.0006057318,0.0005944152,0.9710788,0.005259749,0.01645044],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000497422,0.0001266021,0.004327317,0.0005025557,0.00005693966,0.001247981,0.008705062,0.003315233,0.002928625,0.7851735,0.1934426,0.0001238151],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.09400146,0.003126192,0.03226206,0.05703374,0.0009835873,0.0002932074,0.00005752645,0.0001554643,0.8120869],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9693216,0.0005571198,0.004349306,0.003222088,0.0003189064,0.00007658572,0.00001392579,0.00001765269,0.02212284],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01049384,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05549741,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2132631441","doi":"10.1017/s0008197300000052","title":"Standing under the Human Rights Act 1998: Theories of Rights Enforcement &amp; the Nature of Public Law Adjudication","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":26,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Law; Adjudication; Jurisdiction; Political science; Human rights; Enforcement; Context (archaeology); Convention; Test (biology); Law and economics; Order (exchange); Sociology; Business","authors":[{"name":"Joanna Miles","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02875055831722127,"gpt":0.3049684890346048,"spread":0.2762179307173835,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.008855985,0.0005901693,0.0004914862,0.002807407,0.004016314,0.009839449,0.002250536,0.009382639,0.006297011],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01240886,0.0005014447,0.0006731302,0.003334458,0.03247636,0.00975051,0.002609284,0.006224303,0.0008927772],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.008707934,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00616209,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00965461,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007506378,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9934308,0.003651373,0.0002350169,0.0005360881,0.001537058,0.0006096293],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.990121,0.007259218,0.0009412738,0.0005845951,0.0008713433,0.0002225924],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000001385023,0.000005347531,0.00009416817,0.000007289744,9.93178e-7,0.00001748025,0.0005310535,0.00009247572,0.00000603377,0.9971739,0.0008515717,0.001218343],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001065964,0.00001724535,0.0007676186,0.0001867348,0.000006880488,0.00007860085,0.0007959341,0.0009690874,0.00008498023,0.966242,0.03082973,0.00001056527],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.04346647,0.02152747,0.05561977,0.1194177,0.0005782527,0.0001911474,0.0002060656,0.00004847139,0.7589447],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9437446,0.008402647,0.007841418,0.00583036,0.000933842,0.0004159118,0.0001298879,0.00003325697,0.03266795],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.009839449,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.0631808,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2115370753","doi":"10.1017/s0008197313000718","title":"THE GOD “DILUTION”? RELIGION, DISCRIMINATION AND THE CASE FOR REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Religious Freedom and Discrimination","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":21,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Accommodation; Duty; Normative; Reasonable accommodation; Disadvantage; Compromise; Religious discrimination; Law; Law and economics; Political science; Proportionality (law); Sociology; Psychology","authors":[{"name":"Matthew Gibson","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01498341944532739,"gpt":0.2772541085213401,"spread":0.2622706890760127,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00447134,0.0001379628,0.0002518232,0.0006086169,0.008661144,0.006307341,0.001265372,0.007145214,0.004004644],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009776414,0.00019352,0.000315412,0.0005064923,0.04278287,0.004032934,0.004444574,0.006518872,0.0002888377],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01057406,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007155938,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1266811,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1457376,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9954724,0.002021763,0.0001189362,0.0002864783,0.0009559728,0.001144391],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9960209,0.002232371,0.0003306863,0.0003942414,0.0006078843,0.0004140075],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001116653,0.000008167248,0.0004960031,0.00001052705,0.000001383018,0.0002046873,0.004210722,0.00005782795,0.00007431483,0.9908198,0.002071114,0.002034303],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005612484,0.00005549287,0.005188895,0.0005435935,0.00002202454,0.0008213635,0.03936141,0.00121743,0.0007844561,0.7178628,0.2339982,0.00008815877],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2331178,0.003496837,0.004762738,0.1947774,0.0005545568,0.00003933741,0.00004532202,0.00002656669,0.5631796],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9897993,0.0001794347,0.0002948786,0.003926564,0.00005132283,0.000006215842,0.000003082008,0.000004152733,0.005735124],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1266811,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2518874,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2604343536","doi":"10.1017/s000819731700006x","title":"RUNNERS AND RIDERS: THE HORSEMEAT SCANDAL, EU LAW AND MULTI-LEVEL ENFORCEMENT","year":2017,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Global trade, sustainability, and social impact","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":18,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Enforcement; Food safety; Law; Business; Corporate governance; Political science; Food science; Biology; Finance","authors":[{"name":"Catherine Barnard","is_ca":false},{"name":"Niall O’Connor","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05188507023285473,"gpt":0.2854654525494799,"spread":0.2335803823166252,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01112617,0.0001661202,0.0003256177,0.001217209,0.007107013,0.01473044,0.001030055,0.008168656,0.006084096],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01740433,0.000241239,0.000395569,0.001556287,0.01462352,0.004230334,0.00532832,0.005769449,0.0004556993],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004014031,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005078545,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02661113,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02590792,"domain_scores_codex":[0.991389,0.003690418,0.0004158106,0.0008766653,0.00160845,0.002019674],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9866039,0.007866378,0.002048937,0.0009723954,0.001253871,0.001254585],"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":[0.00009652448,0.00007966502,0.01573807,0.0001049307,0.00003358774,0.001817474,0.01829219,0.0007136909,0.0003169794,0.848733,0.08014255,0.0339314],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005664711,0.0001586974,0.07339755,0.001980899,0.00005377602,0.0009276044,0.0680059,0.00369047,0.001128965,0.1731859,0.677154,0.0002594588],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.451262,0.006587824,0.002676022,0.2043017,0.001114524,0.00003805791,0.000127859,0.0001137529,0.3337783],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9719608,0.0005251935,0.0002539437,0.01592876,0.0001461949,0.00001021673,0.00002053268,0.0000286512,0.01112567],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.02661113,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05884147,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4297896711","doi":"10.1017/s0008197322000198","title":"RECOGNISING STATE BLAME IN SENTENCING: A COMMUNICATIVE AND RELATIONAL FRAMEWORK","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":17,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; McGill University","keywords":"Blame; Punishment (psychology); State (computer science); Context (archaeology); Social psychology; Flexibility (engineering); Psychology; Political science; Epistemology; Criminology; Sociology; Computer science; Economics","authors":[{"name":"Marie Manikis","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04039433290059854,"gpt":0.313343634912937,"spread":0.2729493020123385,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01308808,0.0006763896,0.0005047813,0.003765465,0.007226494,0.0116027,0.002590331,0.004375374,0.004901069],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02157352,0.0005666634,0.0007156389,0.001482297,0.03441918,0.01194943,0.00883285,0.004913274,0.0004396122],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006473741,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00617754,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009341794,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008046791,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9842249,0.01199913,0.0004409614,0.0007025868,0.00174551,0.0008869142],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9838558,0.0102132,0.001841506,0.001583879,0.001732554,0.000773024],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001431942,0.00003658197,0.001030349,0.00006784311,0.00001518728,0.0004485245,0.03399679,0.001776786,0.0004195892,0.954302,0.0003640232,0.007527998],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001272697,0.00008091818,0.002738125,0.0004992899,0.00006492788,0.000793756,0.04023285,0.01066638,0.001052952,0.9167204,0.02705196,0.00008579148],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1475607,0.002086784,0.5180852,0.02889852,0.0003170613,0.0004155833,0.0001478893,0.0004120339,0.3020762],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9736789,0.0003117213,0.02344017,0.0001681967,0.00005439355,0.00006926496,0.00002517829,0.00003065078,0.002221443],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01308808,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06921721,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2070147880","doi":"10.1017/s0008197312000815","title":"FREE MOVEMENT, FEDERALISM AND INSTITUTIONAL CHOICE: A CANADA-EU COMPARISON","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Taxation and Legal Issues","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":17,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Federalism; Multinational corporation; Diversity (politics); State (computer science); Politics; Political science; Free movement; International trade; Political economy; Economics; Business; International economics; Law","authors":[{"name":"Alicia Hinarejos","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02267001476144446,"gpt":0.2402962810305997,"spread":0.2176262662691552,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002275018,0.0002424713,0.0006053907,0.005056567,0.007109584,0.006881733,0.001082648,0.001539106,0.006589216],"category_scores_gemma":[0.006332273,0.0001653094,0.0005989122,0.009836471,0.00630538,0.001619998,0.00299335,0.001415676,0.000220975],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.07046709,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.06451435,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9774562,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9889367,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9949297,0.0005586822,0.0001252292,0.0002891366,0.001588721,0.002508444],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9964482,0.0008142721,0.0003777669,0.0002056782,0.001486598,0.0006674869],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001363251,0.00003554653,0.01821967,0.00008088721,0.00005633282,0.0002040206,0.002028121,0.001829262,0.0001597573,0.9471188,0.008363,0.02176832],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002535667,0.0001483154,0.3571557,0.001012174,0.0004640077,0.0005362977,0.02427118,0.006645501,0.00127216,0.1446793,0.4632948,0.0002669723],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3413008,0.01132774,0.002595139,0.01970846,0.0001512289,0.00008749342,0.00141138,0.00004392436,0.6233738],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9847609,0.003083454,0.0006819479,0.001204136,0.00001996311,0.0000186412,0.0002980537,0.00002059829,0.009912229],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07046709,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.511277,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2161752717","doi":"10.1017/s0008197302001551","title":"Digging the Dirt: Disclosure of Records in Sexual Assault Cases","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":17,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Credibility; Confidentiality; Context (archaeology); Attendance; Anonymity; Criminology; Sexual assault; Political science; Law; Section (typography); Psychology; Sexual violence; Poison control; Medicine; History; Suicide prevention; Business; Medical emergency; Advertising","authors":[{"name":"Jennifer Temkin","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06966465143572685,"gpt":0.3151801492568423,"spread":0.2455154978211154,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03129231,0.0002119533,0.0005460849,0.003269054,0.006166715,0.008199263,0.002159503,0.01528849,0.002334735],"category_scores_gemma":[0.1080003,0.0007731314,0.0005422193,0.003251976,0.01470826,0.01301348,0.008159756,0.008814008,0.0002978008],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005420806,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01237658,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03287527,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.07660334,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9700962,0.01809111,0.002190437,0.0008808304,0.005220783,0.003520656],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9353421,0.05130166,0.006973439,0.002323878,0.002472887,0.001586052],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0002489963,0.0001436352,0.03510204,0.0005733547,0.00004572357,0.01525294,0.1158399,0.000568672,0.0008043917,0.7474544,0.0157336,0.06823244],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002905339,0.001086147,0.1172615,0.009681002,0.0004959361,0.03700498,0.2474743,0.003107007,0.006533558,0.2999922,0.2764428,0.0006301366],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.540168,0.01682473,0.007199352,0.2602812,0.001097056,0.0001847137,0.000183312,0.00004151426,0.1740201],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9671311,0.00702848,0.00212845,0.01757536,0.0005589382,0.0000577654,0.00004974235,0.00001012068,0.005460113],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.03287527,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1654915,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2113299159","doi":"10.1017/s0008197313000482","title":"WINNERS AND LOSERS: <i>EDWARDS</i> AND THE UNFAIR LAW OF DISMISSAL","year":2013,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Notice; Statutory law; Dismissal; Law; Common law; Statute; Political science; Supreme court; Economic Justice; Unfair dismissal; Discipline","authors":[{"name":"Catherine Barnard","is_ca":true},{"name":"Louise Merrett","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.009136205729693987,"gpt":0.2503988532783828,"spread":0.2412626475486888,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01419497,0.0002188916,0.0006100443,0.001398202,0.01022372,0.01154423,0.001774885,0.01247604,0.008178537],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03151878,0.0004162375,0.0004846217,0.0008525167,0.03561233,0.006229995,0.006833495,0.01258057,0.0006129293],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00978919,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006775442,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03873906,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05042468,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9851334,0.005528382,0.0007397034,0.001699986,0.003564393,0.003333999],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9868819,0.008339968,0.00145291,0.0007147665,0.001241263,0.001369263],"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":[0.00003068415,0.00002195127,0.001507232,0.00001161715,0.000006125702,0.0006199855,0.005354407,0.0001009239,0.0001204504,0.9807792,0.008326991,0.003120429],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00008045536,0.0001026854,0.007918099,0.0004162031,0.00004547567,0.00128563,0.02754742,0.002061503,0.0005925201,0.8592755,0.1004963,0.0001783071],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.293034,0.003566914,0.005199021,0.2596006,0.001289517,0.00004608329,0.00006847308,0.00002521152,0.4371701],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9839755,0.0002605954,0.0001911654,0.005816011,0.0002468689,0.00001023672,0.000006185785,0.000008804628,0.009484582],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03873906,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07702714,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2079011279","doi":"10.1017/s000819731400004x","title":"EXPRESS TERMINATION CLAUSES IN CONTRACTS","year":2014,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","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":"Damages; Context (archaeology); Position (finance); Set (abstract data type); Law and economics; Reading (process); Law; Political science; Business; Computer science; Sociology; History","authors":[{"name":"John Randall","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01947397208144135,"gpt":0.3052729486689992,"spread":0.2857989765875579,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01297415,0.0004108264,0.0004879174,0.001249815,0.003266774,0.00669921,0.001892357,0.004169571,0.008708606],"category_scores_gemma":[0.02099054,0.0004367281,0.0007713998,0.001819506,0.0136837,0.006881254,0.0035919,0.006137827,0.0009422397],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.005266562,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004294918,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006900399,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004978217,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9866467,0.005248482,0.001258097,0.0009458902,0.004699404,0.001201386],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9862569,0.007591489,0.0009280336,0.001857212,0.003093823,0.0002725465],"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":[0.000001646058,0.000001439671,0.00002023835,0.000004399851,6.601209e-7,0.00001369924,0.0001994075,0.00007769562,0.00003019192,0.9983684,0.0005353524,0.0007468592],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0000163228,0.00001673681,0.0001623208,0.0001161196,0.00001058894,0.0001085365,0.0003889232,0.00175937,0.0005984657,0.926929,0.06987152,0.00002224693],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.04121889,0.002212955,0.1962114,0.01433543,0.0009471386,0.0002556429,0.0004277679,0.0002725687,0.7441182],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8646353,0.001280766,0.04648786,0.005790445,0.0006735712,0.0005415139,0.0003029979,0.0001568679,0.0801307],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01297415,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06861466,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2028202664","doi":"10.1017/s0008197303006342","title":"St. German on Reason and Parliamentary Sovereignty","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","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":false},"ca_institutions":"Queen's University","funders":"","keywords":"Parliament; Sovereignty; Parliamentary sovereignty; Law; Statute; German; Popular sovereignty; Political science; History","authors":[{"name":"Mark Walters","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01873888407128695,"gpt":0.2938257013767608,"spread":0.2750868173054739,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009909699,0.0003286501,0.0002861237,0.0007851865,0.004437751,0.00320038,0.0003555564,0.003692542,0.00486322],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001505101,0.0001726032,0.0002429981,0.000822939,0.01400363,0.003219235,0.00212234,0.003702453,0.00071186],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006232067,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002539723,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02089719,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03647259,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999063,0.0003110832,0.00002558536,0.0001583829,0.000193177,0.0002488393],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9996696,0.0002001392,0.00002647804,0.00002412353,0.00005117975,0.00002867254],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000004939518,0.000001913693,0.0000645257,0.000006069828,9.937215e-7,0.00003181021,0.0007084386,0.00003356298,0.00002710238,0.9905993,0.007275591,0.001245804],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001568168,0.00001287561,0.0009426555,0.0001654899,0.000005548566,0.00007465816,0.000773967,0.0001166085,0.0001907794,0.5812933,0.4163954,0.00001302302],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0254056,0.03879428,0.002063558,0.08872519,0.001244386,0.00001856162,0.000144605,0.00002169603,0.8435822],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7662126,0.01546523,0.0009905919,0.04469225,0.001340854,0.00005741162,0.00008109312,0.00004494835,0.1711149],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02089719,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.04521704,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2073258159","doi":"10.1017/s0008197301000642","title":"Liability in Respect of the Intoxicated","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues","field":"Health Professions","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":"Liability; Tort; Harm; Strict liability; Law; Business; Work (physics); Law and economics; Political science; Sociology; Engineering","authors":[{"name":"Claire McIvor","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.06566853386219451,"gpt":0.4158273649428674,"spread":0.3501588310806729,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00288736,0.0002389268,0.000360588,0.0007204514,0.004047378,0.002656387,0.001020929,0.008135471,0.003550474],"category_scores_gemma":[0.009334052,0.0002331605,0.0007421966,0.000372477,0.01046276,0.002486717,0.006992814,0.004656032,0.0007114551],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001529345,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004091725,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.007116097,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008072942,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9963025,0.000978336,0.0002111484,0.0002995872,0.00150028,0.0007080939],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9969634,0.001343231,0.0005615524,0.0003215227,0.0004369957,0.000373276],"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":[0.00003246583,0.00002881639,0.00296029,0.00004489664,0.00001889733,0.006253218,0.01153229,0.0006113957,0.001128197,0.955743,0.00710693,0.01453955],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002622427,0.0002287417,0.006467612,0.0006522131,0.00004992845,0.01414247,0.007372916,0.001167964,0.002423684,0.692176,0.27522,0.00007223951],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1736611,0.01116254,0.02975061,0.1247742,0.00164011,0.00007771346,0.00009205785,0.00008122628,0.6587605],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9443362,0.002789664,0.001668419,0.009918713,0.0006637701,0.00002402202,0.00002054847,0.00001436157,0.04056443],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.008135471,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.01526999,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4255917115","doi":"10.1017/s0008197308000044","title":"Sham Trusts","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Testamentary trust; Lease; Database transaction; Context (archaeology); Doctrine; Statutory law; Law; Payment; Business; Law and economics; Political science; Sociology; History; Computer science; Finance","authors":[{"name":"Matthew Conaglen","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04437690517440169,"gpt":0.3045272433894376,"spread":0.2601503382150359,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0051108,0.0003281794,0.0005053472,0.001042844,0.006587082,0.008451919,0.001093956,0.003806579,0.01849525],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01939537,0.0003478361,0.0005307136,0.001025997,0.01996483,0.01056727,0.007009804,0.003752707,0.00270966],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006445225,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.006632716,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004873555,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.004207655,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9925863,0.002227887,0.0004853123,0.0009706564,0.002205883,0.001524002],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9887567,0.003314223,0.001626063,0.002102565,0.002695989,0.001504372],"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":[0.000007231884,0.000003978509,0.0002591691,0.00002083304,0.000002634574,0.0001322571,0.002480969,0.0000554405,0.00006472682,0.9917169,0.00277539,0.002480397],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002293257,0.0000487775,0.000713699,0.0002018829,0.00001732205,0.0007585844,0.00635042,0.000753728,0.0002674596,0.7429664,0.2478644,0.00003430217],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.07650859,0.002458384,0.03267551,0.02627911,0.001005981,0.0001743621,0.000233266,0.0002201312,0.8604447],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9133208,0.000771297,0.002075076,0.002165955,0.0002179925,0.0000764979,0.00006471542,0.00004208563,0.08126559],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.01849525,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06187284,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4386784288","doi":"10.1017/s0008197323000417","title":"THE UK INTERNAL MARKET: A GLOBAL OUTLIER?","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Global Financial Regulation and Crises","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Centralisation; Domestic market; Market integration; Single market; Deregulation; Blueprint; Globalization; Economics; Market analysis; Business; Market segmentation; Market economy; International trade; European union; Marketing; Macroeconomics; Engineering","authors":[{"name":"Jan Zglinski","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0223271284515544,"gpt":0.2362116216415862,"spread":0.2138844931900318,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004209961,0.0002321694,0.000391233,0.001819493,0.001828792,0.01041927,0.0007245243,0.003455099,0.0140794],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01231973,0.0001545998,0.0003031684,0.002311624,0.005999323,0.005334221,0.004249578,0.002964651,0.001957448],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007971752,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003592773,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02662054,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02149379,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9952785,0.001285405,0.0002591123,0.0007139557,0.001376237,0.001086928],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9921846,0.002337511,0.001301308,0.0008905337,0.002498526,0.0007875942],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00008392315,0.0000256719,0.00703696,0.0001450835,0.00001768444,0.001080659,0.004411111,0.0004263189,0.0002140694,0.7184979,0.2181504,0.04991012],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00003096724,0.00006791688,0.01891964,0.0007670151,0.00002162204,0.001281539,0.01278265,0.001276305,0.0006217405,0.1056063,0.8585237,0.0001005845],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1257393,0.0116657,0.004748112,0.309611,0.004631024,0.00004932516,0.001203381,0.0003569959,0.5419951],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9191076,0.003682565,0.0008980671,0.04009194,0.001179632,0.00004170808,0.0004176191,0.0002022645,0.03437881],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02662054,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05783933,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2113519645","doi":"10.1017/s000819730000012x","title":"The Rule Against Perpetuities and the Law Commission's Flawed Philosophy","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Property Rights and Legal Doctrine","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Commission; Law; Rule of law; Perpetuity; Political science; Law and economics; Property (philosophy); Economics; Philosophy; Epistemology; Politics","authors":[{"name":"Thomas P. Gallanis","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0158566166796701,"gpt":0.2507193452691885,"spread":0.2348627285895184,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.04961703,0.0005577549,0.001716165,0.002852018,0.01093921,0.02332673,0.004299314,0.03052819,0.00169113],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06387585,0.0008171619,0.001502924,0.002155896,0.1008699,0.01456598,0.006858813,0.03682509,0.0006244045],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01790937,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02765249,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.04339316,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0250375,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9581921,0.01525511,0.002413225,0.005365946,0.01575899,0.003014561],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9649053,0.02313409,0.001764924,0.003640172,0.00521349,0.001341939],"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":[0.000001450563,0.000002198652,0.00001768556,0.000003267249,0.000001282359,0.00000981849,0.0003367748,0.00004696579,0.000005990754,0.9974447,0.001475569,0.0006542542],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002277711,0.00001082146,0.00005113022,0.00006993839,0.000009209755,0.00003759101,0.0002387636,0.0003470079,0.00008315343,0.9448364,0.05426817,0.00002497896],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01945757,0.01340574,0.07321402,0.5732622,0.007722038,0.0001430948,0.0001297849,0.0002413116,0.3124242],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7701332,0.003762643,0.03426703,0.1323083,0.005681016,0.000420542,0.00005386907,0.0002426038,0.05313088],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04961703,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2624031,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2312918544","doi":"10.1017/s0008197315000112","title":"GOOD FAITH PERFORMANCE IN CANADIAN CONTRACT LAW","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Duty; Law; Faith; Honesty; Good faith; Obligation; Fair dealing; Bad faith; Context (archaeology); Negotiation; Commonwealth; Political science; Corporation; Sociology; Law and economics; Philosophy; Theology; History","authors":[{"name":"Chris Hunt","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0343651089007624,"gpt":0.2922794206929256,"spread":0.2579143117921632,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005726849,0.0005690872,0.00034713,0.001949458,0.02981197,0.009394126,0.002045163,0.006760357,0.01463232],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01341433,0.0007025379,0.000607001,0.0029812,0.01152835,0.003600257,0.004284533,0.008839861,0.001439854],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1143662,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.1380219,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9848788,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9872082,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9906096,0.0009860306,0.0002419992,0.001134162,0.004477765,0.00255053],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9956288,0.0008415408,0.0001536369,0.0002399189,0.002267543,0.0008685489],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001006348,0.00001069258,0.0006571764,0.00002712646,0.000003154764,0.0001573208,0.004010683,0.0001736608,0.00007773229,0.9471157,0.03782662,0.009930164],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002053418,0.00002813647,0.006976711,0.0002016185,0.0000168947,0.0002221438,0.003112481,0.0009022353,0.0002497599,0.06360992,0.9245158,0.0001437736],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01973199,0.004890295,0.002772239,0.04150503,0.0008934574,0.0001428589,0.0003673028,0.00008466514,0.9296122],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.5693828,0.004314804,0.004708551,0.03011541,0.0002808502,0.000162334,0.0003229223,0.0001188941,0.3905933],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1143662,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8297887,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4380886494","doi":"10.1017/s0008197323000193","title":"WHAT IS THE HARM IN ADDICTION? AUTONOMY, VULNERABILITY, AND THE CASE FOR HARM REDUCTION DRUG POLICY","year":2023,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk","field":"Medicine","cited_by":3,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Waterloo","funders":"","keywords":"Harm reduction; Harm; Addiction; Abstinence; Autonomy; Vulnerability (computing); Normative; Aside; Criminology; Political science; Law and economics; Public health; Psychology; Psychiatry; Medicine; Law; Sociology; Nursing; Computer security","authors":[{"name":"Mathieu Doucet","is_ca":true},{"name":"Lindsey Porter","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04326781635267888,"gpt":0.3617405016173014,"spread":0.3184726852646225,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.02099338,0.0002315557,0.0006898255,0.0009924354,0.006881835,0.009213369,0.001089613,0.01140726,0.003719824],"category_scores_gemma":[0.027464,0.0003040922,0.0005487598,0.0006186969,0.06415175,0.01019389,0.007911673,0.01057175,0.0002866848],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007393231,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.008658463,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009550126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006671307,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9872263,0.008423598,0.0003056139,0.0008648601,0.001532968,0.001646583],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9724678,0.02135783,0.001261294,0.001128927,0.0011758,0.002608258],"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":[0.000008944598,0.00001254627,0.0006591158,0.0000187603,0.00000457471,0.0001140287,0.001524827,0.000180687,0.00005007104,0.9931709,0.002573606,0.001682012],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001129384,0.000008426616,0.0004922712,0.0001032089,0.000004355691,0.0001001616,0.001680551,0.0003520091,0.00006153306,0.9785089,0.0186638,0.00001347934],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.03290631,0.003733337,0.004416527,0.8713928,0.0004017733,0.00002591117,0.00003705245,0.00001266089,0.08707364],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9409479,0.001523822,0.0009071752,0.05171528,0.0007402857,0.00005974522,0.000009960168,0.00001474758,0.004081103],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02099338,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1110249,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2036468157","doi":"10.1017/s0008197302251600","title":"NEGLIGENCE: CANADA REMAKES THE <i>ANNS</i> TEST","year":2002,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Law, logistics, and international trade","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Statutory law; Corporation; Government (linguistics); Statute; Payment; Business; Test (biology); Law; Finance; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Stephen G. A. Pitel","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02439192550982928,"gpt":0.1952105144384081,"spread":0.1708185889285789,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004703062,0.0004299179,0.0005642551,0.00129952,0.02605108,0.008163125,0.003210317,0.01723144,0.01814209],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01820654,0.0005280345,0.0006971904,0.001215075,0.008025839,0.002685076,0.003506581,0.01156541,0.001734737],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.04736983,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.1597119,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9744875,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9896258,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9917405,0.0004379487,0.0002252407,0.0008187072,0.004057073,0.00272054],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9901186,0.00230179,0.0002987684,0.0004053002,0.004077626,0.002797916],"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":[0.00005042449,0.00005368356,0.009481695,0.00007806175,0.00003059228,0.001771078,0.003027437,0.0003075182,0.0003967102,0.2590937,0.6927969,0.03291221],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00006898459,0.00007355609,0.02128609,0.0006609639,0.00009753711,0.0006257105,0.00602389,0.0008296103,0.0007550332,0.0225383,0.946869,0.0001712909],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02967356,0.003449701,0.0009696738,0.3438804,0.002381654,0.0001140621,0.0006780591,0.0001292584,0.6187236],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.3634551,0.003443978,0.001053407,0.2910452,0.0006020624,0.00008473235,0.0003881252,0.0001339079,0.3397935],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.04736983,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3436938,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2029375586","doi":"10.1017/s0008197306007240","title":"PRIVACY IN PUBLIC PLACES","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Law in Society and Culture","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of Victoria","funders":"","keywords":"Right to privacy; Internet privacy; The Right to Privacy; Information privacy; Privacy law; Political science; Event (particle physics); Privacy policy; Law; Law and economics; Sociology; Computer science; Human rights","authors":[{"name":"N. A. Moreham","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02230662484784799,"gpt":0.2728034082497127,"spread":0.2504967834018647,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003709319,0.000214847,0.0004127822,0.0004960662,0.007028975,0.01054533,0.0009154634,0.006404932,0.009639095],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00818547,0.0003228124,0.0005465507,0.0008709647,0.0180643,0.01289658,0.006069948,0.004970271,0.001246025],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003496457,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003722669,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.008184061,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006546409,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9929103,0.003123826,0.0002455499,0.0008744557,0.001492139,0.001353668],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9950889,0.002252993,0.0006621861,0.001124417,0.0004812887,0.0003902902],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001009197,0.00001110102,0.0004179668,0.00001638902,0.000003182156,0.0001981881,0.004474856,0.0001070689,0.00008915905,0.9844165,0.005028101,0.005227314],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001304854,0.00004641763,0.001575338,0.0002566824,0.00001326827,0.0006974238,0.01250813,0.0005441383,0.0006075061,0.7329983,0.2507023,0.00003757953],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.08410722,0.005432919,0.02163478,0.1116584,0.0005659676,0.00004486227,0.0002393194,0.00006138843,0.7762551],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9619117,0.001088696,0.0009631356,0.005380899,0.000310563,0.00002764958,0.00003620547,0.00001427819,0.03026696],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.01054533,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.03224593,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2166977184","doi":"10.1017/s0008197301000666","title":"Relief Against Forfeiture: A Restatement","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Obligation; Doctrine; Law; Jurisdiction; Creditor; Economic Justice; Security interest; Debt; Law and economics; Business; Political science; Unjust enrichment; Choice of law; Restitution; Economics; Finance","authors":[{"name":"Lionel Smith","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02924547741279984,"gpt":0.3171947528902771,"spread":0.2879492754774773,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.01891788,0.0007230227,0.001327283,0.001386218,0.007354768,0.01079413,0.00441737,0.02693132,0.006351626],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03816035,0.0007852565,0.001907449,0.0006440473,0.03108111,0.01305339,0.01426495,0.0146032,0.001612349],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003930018,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.005470136,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002556439,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002588245,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9751751,0.009968431,0.001588763,0.004028782,0.005395025,0.003843953],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9878781,0.005309787,0.001152788,0.003150199,0.00178213,0.0007270369],"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":[0.00003171067,0.00003899579,0.0001649278,0.00002339159,0.00001208422,0.0003433975,0.001070433,0.0002244729,0.0003323077,0.9866676,0.005287055,0.005803517],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001167439,0.000251733,0.001017129,0.0003275274,0.00006671999,0.001353948,0.001404852,0.002322221,0.00140747,0.8082765,0.1833442,0.0001108798],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.05242437,0.006484174,0.07180191,0.2247912,0.003005195,0.0002938661,0.00008349857,0.000345557,0.6407703],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8710034,0.001294818,0.008186139,0.03874524,0.001884212,0.0003004195,0.00003765383,0.0001435142,0.07840455],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02693132,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.1000485,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2110013063","doi":"10.1017/s0008197300300101","title":"<scp>A DUTY TO GIVE REASONS?</scp>","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Appeal; Estate; Duty; Aside; Law; Flannery; Psychology; Political science; Philosophy; Theology","authors":[{"name":"J. A. Jolowicz","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01980588086920288,"gpt":0.2934907427046273,"spread":0.2736848618354245,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003810874,0.0003974934,0.0003550684,0.0005294434,0.007789826,0.00477906,0.001342068,0.02192549,0.0267481],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01144744,0.0004949954,0.0005100457,0.0005561382,0.009279176,0.004411519,0.002397986,0.009791343,0.01003323],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.003247926,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004738084,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03210766,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06425846,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9971421,0.000873706,0.0001374511,0.0002658578,0.0008986967,0.0006822226],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9969603,0.001385841,0.0002145491,0.0003094614,0.0007684367,0.0003613244],"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":[0.0000167271,0.00001426416,0.0003104793,0.00003918385,0.000003950588,0.0002747609,0.002091584,0.00003224048,0.0001264395,0.4404198,0.5499187,0.006751863],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001885859,0.00001968963,0.0008456371,0.0002183189,0.000006970019,0.0005196468,0.001997282,0.0001400474,0.0002842658,0.09204002,0.9038833,0.00002587773],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.003598408,0.001831166,0.0017924,0.4037074,0.002437901,0.00005381373,0.0001643114,0.00009149189,0.5863232],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.1893632,0.00142629,0.001869154,0.518572,0.002452118,0.0001665183,0.0001246968,0.0001113305,0.2859147],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03210766,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.08948129,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2158558054","doi":"10.1017/s0008197300000027","title":"Practice Directions and the Civil Procedure Rules","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal Issues in South Africa","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"Trinity College","funders":"","keywords":"Statutory law; Jurisdiction; Statute; Civil procedure; Law; Political science; Law and economics; Sociology","authors":[{"name":"J. A. Jolowicz","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01075327942641843,"gpt":0.2881412668132629,"spread":0.2773879873868444,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.03894026,0.0005509731,0.0005371639,0.002469419,0.008315504,0.01222993,0.001890014,0.009290945,0.005563039],"category_scores_gemma":[0.06120384,0.000817574,0.0005573157,0.002284953,0.08489487,0.01680401,0.007070661,0.01396415,0.001019368],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.009247234,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02333278,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009568863,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.007458447,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9463193,0.03173591,0.003424384,0.00459377,0.01043702,0.00348965],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9496989,0.02995719,0.005065063,0.006270933,0.006583951,0.002424021],"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":[9.0674e-7,0.000002741099,0.00003882829,0.000006642173,5.391967e-7,0.00001469604,0.001069327,0.00002584083,0.00001495742,0.9970139,0.0005200154,0.001291585],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002302671,0.00001927328,0.0003548289,0.0001907453,0.000003849775,0.0001221224,0.002466591,0.0001668526,0.0001274349,0.8777412,0.1187635,0.00002065166],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02265034,0.004889534,0.05853812,0.1668894,0.0009601958,0.0003233092,0.00008399104,0.0001035886,0.7455615],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.899079,0.003089922,0.03959931,0.01711079,0.0007603206,0.0006653983,0.00008989905,0.00009465044,0.03951059],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03894026,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2059383,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2213666015","doi":"10.1017/s0008197315000471","title":"“THE CHOICE IS CRUEL”: ASSISTED SUICIDE AND CHARTER RIGHTS IN CANADA","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Law; Charter; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Stéphanie Palmer","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.05343000211374625,"gpt":0.3076852628311166,"spread":0.2542552607173703,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003115056,0.0003010076,0.000476408,0.001674348,0.03361618,0.01090793,0.002843637,0.006893923,0.009014408],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01257033,0.000442327,0.0005728959,0.00368821,0.01966213,0.003997872,0.005599717,0.01166441,0.0002821242],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.1683796,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.3149643,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9979796,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9990032,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9946615,0.0006455682,0.00009525292,0.0004180016,0.001317636,0.002862181],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9936687,0.001504925,0.0003553333,0.0001693723,0.001861222,0.002440325],"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":[0.00009067257,0.00009916449,0.01939187,0.00006956192,0.00003154266,0.001042894,0.03800027,0.0006990454,0.0001502825,0.8582203,0.05854298,0.0236615],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003440175,0.00009469849,0.1159133,0.001166296,0.0002008543,0.0008331302,0.146706,0.003993752,0.0006118205,0.1701938,0.5593813,0.0005610686],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3062047,0.01230036,0.001330031,0.2885667,0.0009740221,0.0001143563,0.0006765432,0.0000386229,0.3897947],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9504628,0.003733559,0.0004102329,0.02047301,0.0001163472,0.00003356966,0.0001090678,0.00002840496,0.02463296],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1683796,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9645618,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2001130030","doi":"10.1017/s0008197301680619","title":"<scp>HOW OLD DID YOU THINK SHE WAS?</scp>","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Statute; Statutory law; Parliament; Law; Assertion; Element (criminal law); Political science; Quarter (Canadian coin); History; Archaeology; Politics; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"P. R. Glazebrook","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02704306520373176,"gpt":0.2829666507860069,"spread":0.2559235855822751,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009477636,0.0004631498,0.0003557371,0.0006872064,0.004052948,0.003495773,0.0005559776,0.003577998,0.09703283],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007259829,0.0001376615,0.00026865,0.000518001,0.001965807,0.003497722,0.001672961,0.003755942,0.06155753],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002468358,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.001562753,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02441437,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0420666,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991369,0.0002314434,0.0000310067,0.0001101593,0.0003089093,0.0001816273],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980139,0.0003824389,0.0001537852,0.000115383,0.0009813234,0.000353242],"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":[0.000009540654,0.000005856431,0.0005911165,0.00003177935,0.000001209225,0.0001333169,0.002135538,0.000007411374,0.00006725881,0.005341347,0.9716688,0.0200069],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000001569429,0.000007539418,0.001013075,0.0001341921,0.00000118631,0.0003253158,0.005125377,0.00002439138,0.00007144154,0.001916643,0.9913685,0.00001081032],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.006421307,0.006346399,0.001492335,0.4002107,0.01624377,0.0001082817,0.003090315,0.0003461577,0.5657408],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.09005567,0.004536008,0.001104956,0.2241612,0.005282313,0.0002074013,0.001370461,0.0003353201,0.6729466],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.09703283,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3246071,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W4210873251","doi":"10.1017/s0008197321001045","title":"REMARKS ON TECHNOLOGICAL NEUTRALITY IN COPYRIGHT LAW AS A SUBJECT MATTER PROBLEM: LESSONS FROM CANADA","year":2022,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Copyright and Intellectual Property","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Neutrality; Copyright law; Proposition; Subject matter; Expression (computer science); Subject (documents); Fair use; Net neutrality; Law and economics; Law; Liability; Intellectual property; Corollary; Fair dealing; Nothing; Digital Millennium Copyright Act; Political science; Sociology; Computer science; The Internet; Epistemology; Philosophy; Mathematics","authors":[{"name":"Abraham Drassinower","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01979830643579752,"gpt":0.2230356688341039,"spread":0.2032373623983064,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009282916,0.0003799688,0.001398755,0.002544846,0.01754158,0.01665128,0.003496387,0.00969173,0.01615155],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0340805,0.0003888775,0.0009083932,0.004091084,0.02792438,0.01234442,0.005390506,0.009899064,0.0008096556],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.07579231,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.1001198,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9418126,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8964829,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9903691,0.001637692,0.0004041921,0.001200977,0.003742272,0.002645625],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9793783,0.01074788,0.0005849263,0.001441422,0.006382384,0.001465108],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001522183,0.00001115496,0.000374082,0.00001930728,0.000006686707,0.0001237265,0.000850302,0.0004534518,0.00005404998,0.9898317,0.004381812,0.00387841],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00005675373,0.00001492231,0.001338583,0.0001658621,0.00002740887,0.00008228509,0.002724479,0.002314925,0.0002689975,0.8900715,0.1028623,0.00007193438],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.05223403,0.004302358,0.009399248,0.2394668,0.0005768592,0.00008688631,0.0003118501,0.0001184504,0.6935035],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9132167,0.003509778,0.004503967,0.02228229,0.0004669944,0.0000780222,0.0001236227,0.0001316845,0.05568688],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.07579231,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5499143,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2152559745","doi":"10.1017/s0008197303326212","title":"Exemplary Damages—Two Commonwealth Cases","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Commonwealth; Damages; Jurisdiction; Law; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Andrew Phang","is_ca":false},{"name":"Pey Woan Lee","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04775190898519161,"gpt":0.3482933056171605,"spread":0.3005413966319689,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0049717,0.0004944986,0.0006116072,0.001607125,0.01001779,0.004580539,0.002640086,0.01194012,0.004283361],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01777793,0.0005511437,0.001359145,0.001625362,0.008526007,0.003799286,0.0104354,0.008936899,0.000618711],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004450639,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00269141,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03740664,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.06432792,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9915302,0.001759642,0.0004171787,0.0009744384,0.00306852,0.00225021],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.992339,0.003497316,0.0007493546,0.001230678,0.001066055,0.001117535],"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":[0.0001467258,0.0001976543,0.009143678,0.0001115006,0.00006411115,0.00904549,0.0155062,0.000736015,0.0009143627,0.898904,0.04715979,0.01807046],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003541024,0.0003476683,0.05817861,0.001026251,0.0002771608,0.0173266,0.02153712,0.00314624,0.0035496,0.238488,0.6553712,0.0003975843],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3685153,0.005257179,0.008686176,0.04412022,0.0009012862,0.0003495975,0.0004505097,0.0001099338,0.5716097],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9344399,0.001821476,0.00233658,0.01129673,0.0004337171,0.0002848811,0.0001925067,0.00003388531,0.04916028],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.03740664,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.07437783,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1828715469","doi":"10.1017/s0008197315000306","title":"THE MODERN FUNCTIONS OF THE ECONOMIC TORTS: REVIEWING THE ENGLISH, CANADIAN, AUSTRALIAN, AND NEW ZEALAND POSITIONS","year":2015,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Plaintiff; Tort; Harm; Liability; Function (biology); Law; Phenomenon; Business; Law and economics; Political science; Economics","authors":[{"name":"Hazel Carty","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.04985250084441758,"gpt":0.2863151102956585,"spread":0.2364626094512409,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005217249,0.0004684888,0.0004948808,0.01301919,0.006844666,0.005775102,0.001489021,0.001689308,0.003019379],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01175787,0.0003461059,0.0003486674,0.01315914,0.02269828,0.003598349,0.001257245,0.003213303,0.0002449859],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.08024416,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.06194761,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9526303,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9750837,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9956446,0.0006022844,0.0002281806,0.0002540593,0.002491402,0.0007795092],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9884248,0.003501468,0.001104232,0.0002207798,0.006089696,0.0006591285],"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":[0.00003302602,0.00003952083,0.006611296,0.001503855,0.00002948141,0.001129799,0.06401587,0.0006970405,0.0005059412,0.7562993,0.05117093,0.117964],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00000727115,0.00002882657,0.07515959,0.004891105,0.00008613201,0.0006202498,0.04273764,0.0008802377,0.0002844088,0.02778522,0.8474171,0.0001022777],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.100832,0.4476709,0.002304033,0.09706189,0.001938026,0.00008672186,0.0003509122,0.00003531782,0.3497201],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6577169,0.3059071,0.00276664,0.007276316,0.001343146,0.00003456787,0.000125341,0.00004314251,0.02478675],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.08024416,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5822148,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2107027439","doi":"10.1017/s0008197307000876","title":"THE PASSING OF PASSING-ON IN CANADA","year":2007,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Canadian Identity and History","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Computer science; Message passing; Content (measure theory); Programming language; Mathematics","authors":[{"name":"Gerald Henry Louis Fridman","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.009769972929983222,"gpt":0.2278878778795388,"spread":0.2181179049495556,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002287204,0.0003733847,0.0007498894,0.001095024,0.0366593,0.009355854,0.002158595,0.0037316,0.03012974],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007200459,0.0005414586,0.0005265471,0.002280894,0.0073921,0.00275137,0.00534523,0.006594218,0.001596476],"about_ca_system_candidate":true,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.143431,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.2171565,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9957584,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9984164,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9914846,0.0004732002,0.0001105142,0.0007402947,0.002044694,0.005146729],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.996085,0.0002830249,0.0001215813,0.0001909034,0.001897657,0.001421799],"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":[0.0001392563,0.00004609455,0.01537806,0.0001229733,0.00004995325,0.001421026,0.07813167,0.0004970358,0.0005199572,0.6284549,0.2355826,0.03965658],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001754927,0.00003446534,0.02987141,0.0002942566,0.00006075612,0.0002057318,0.06896795,0.0004774384,0.0005156632,0.01201067,0.8874158,0.0001282274],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1949238,0.002745229,0.001186624,0.05094531,0.001476929,0.000116807,0.001501846,0.0001458688,0.7469576],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7289335,0.001027747,0.0004172979,0.006791371,0.00007536259,0.00002929624,0.0002736522,0.0001303222,0.2623214],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.143431,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9934986,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W1983153865","doi":"10.1017/s0008197300250101","title":"<scp>FOR LOVE OR MONEY? DEPENDENT CARERS AND FAMILY PROVISION</scp>","year":2000,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Estate; Settlement (finance); Daughter; Damages; Entitlement (fair division); Law; Business; Quarter (Canadian coin); Estate planning; Inheritance (genetic algorithm); Payment; Political science; Law and economics; Economics; Finance; History","authors":[{"name":"Stuart Bridge","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.02530996501087253,"gpt":0.2971921425248232,"spread":0.2718821775139507,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000803768,0.0003610233,0.0002893525,0.0004646921,0.004965066,0.003436281,0.001260043,0.008109809,0.1793103],"category_scores_gemma":[0.004199182,0.0003365281,0.0003647928,0.0004256443,0.001055722,0.001836409,0.002553643,0.004483346,0.0573557],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002415757,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.003787648,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.06935254,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.2073077,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992144,0.0001015304,0.00004111708,0.00008373609,0.0002783941,0.0002808608],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9982957,0.0004281851,0.00007435575,0.0001309474,0.000545936,0.0005248769],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.000005637684,0.00001059842,0.0001567296,0.0000180872,6.258838e-7,0.0001812939,0.0001653259,0.000009844033,0.00006536302,0.004653681,0.9874259,0.007306906],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000004499033,0.0000076456,0.001057478,0.00007256614,0.000001068105,0.0001527217,0.0004346205,0.00002234778,0.00005432844,0.0005855772,0.9976011,0.000005958342],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.002746807,0.002454384,0.0003272689,0.1409874,0.007582402,0.0001495294,0.001082481,0.00036372,0.8443059],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.01156839,0.001138433,0.0002902402,0.107642,0.001816683,0.0001245358,0.0004819501,0.0001742914,0.8767635],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.1793103,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5998528,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2145274391","doi":"10.1017/s0008197306007070","title":"THE MYSTERY OF OLD BAILEY COUNSEL","year":2006,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Historical Economic and Social Studies","field":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Quarter (Canadian coin); Law; Right to counsel; History; Genealogy; Legal history; Political science; Archaeology; Supreme court","authors":[{"name":"Thomas P. Gallanis","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.01745220945934145,"gpt":0.1878700852227872,"spread":0.1704178757634457,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.009972698,0.0001377127,0.0003519353,0.001463179,0.00827184,0.007809698,0.001173907,0.005953941,0.0109363],"category_scores_gemma":[0.03281342,0.0005522465,0.0001311963,0.001221867,0.0231502,0.0109823,0.0031253,0.01050478,0.001259833],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.006548401,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004998856,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02244158,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.03669235,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9940889,0.001989034,0.0002044193,0.001153,0.001560012,0.001004667],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9868537,0.006147018,0.001213825,0.0006570098,0.001879716,0.003248685],"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":[0.00003680589,0.00004374564,0.00307103,0.00002844537,0.000005833848,0.0001695092,0.01954296,0.00008331175,0.0001086616,0.9109312,0.04332805,0.02265037],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001867116,0.0000600756,0.005723201,0.0001894384,0.000008014137,0.0003547506,0.01310885,0.0001725554,0.0003442254,0.1557868,0.8241866,0.00004683255],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.1128628,0.01327229,0.003421783,0.6522429,0.002898571,0.00002040133,0.0001630093,0.00008229802,0.215036],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8711656,0.003557641,0.0007447559,0.06492644,0.002344346,0.00002361446,0.00003484308,0.0001022578,0.05710051],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.02244158,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.05274129,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2037372397","doi":"10.1017/s000819730327639x","title":"<i>Corporate Governance in Australia and New Zealand.</i> By J<scp>ohn</scp> F<scp>arrar</scp>. [Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2001. xxvi, 472 and (Appendices and Index) 52 pp. Paperback £33.99. ISBN 0–19–551314–2.]","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Nothing; Corporate governance; Exaggeration; Jurisdiction; Index (typography); Position (finance); Political science; China; Scope (computer science); Law; Management; Economics; Psychology; Computer science","authors":[{"name":"L. S. Sealy","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03242002292802194,"gpt":0.2548486047052972,"spread":0.2224285817772753,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005159869,0.0005696809,0.0004366679,0.001014546,0.001228333,0.003005686,0.0004854198,0.001103417,0.016763],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001850422,0.0005346658,0.0002931908,0.003174894,0.002011977,0.003423472,0.001097421,0.001851933,0.002717526],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.007348253,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.007437406,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2959852,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4792326,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9995814,0.0000406329,0.00003086881,0.00004857337,0.0002296993,0.00006884686],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995572,0.00007676494,0.0001111127,0.00002248779,0.0001157023,0.0001167222],"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":[0.00001991015,0.00002696485,0.001144801,0.0008860414,0.00001182477,0.0002635792,0.006656223,0.000203381,0.0003444848,0.02985038,0.7995071,0.1610852],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000006890584,0.00001675526,0.01428902,0.0006750615,0.000007235595,0.000193732,0.001881655,0.0001115561,0.0000566264,0.004448949,0.9783028,0.000009720812],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.007085297,0.7085251,0.0008299247,0.05789226,0.006631696,0.0001029846,0.000465707,0.00007973677,0.2183874],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.08867887,0.3073377,0.001564834,0.005615649,0.002266034,0.0001601699,0.0006062605,0.0001014605,0.593669],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2959852,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.5885247,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W7155685037","doi":"10.1017/s0008197326101147","title":"<i>Sources of English Legal History: Public Law to 1750</i> . By John H. Baker. [Oxford University Press, 2024. lii + 788 pp. Hardback £157.50. ISBN 978-0-19954-679-4.]","year":2025,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Historical Legal Studies and Society","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false},"ca_institutions":"University of New Brunswick","funders":"","keywords":"Public law; English law; Jurisprudence; Legal history; Legal research","authors":[{"name":"Paul Warchuk","is_ca":true}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.0142842880183496,"gpt":0.2220195717210987,"spread":0.2077352837027491,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0005200903,0.0007244694,0.0003755052,0.004820549,0.001108458,0.003131217,0.0008025901,0.0009200172,0.1109524],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002348324,0.0004385095,0.0002183686,0.006697954,0.001503565,0.004796098,0.001579313,0.001115472,0.026377],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004032694,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002705732,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02271341,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.04360061,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9996823,0.00005992989,0.00002692502,0.00003554493,0.000152269,0.00004299333],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994142,0.0001804788,0.00009511116,0.00003437754,0.0002151383,0.00006070679],"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":[0.00001206355,0.00000419708,0.00009458776,0.0004949817,0.000003039087,0.00003776184,0.0007220581,0.00002614925,0.00005668589,0.01322533,0.9045759,0.08074727],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000001361597,0.000002375105,0.0007480357,0.0009245164,0.000001522325,0.0000361609,0.0004074094,0.00001332856,0.0000343555,0.003388643,0.9944396,0.00000267421],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"review","genre_scores_codex":[0.001044683,0.6895685,0.001105233,0.03004877,0.005488682,0.00004599227,0.004392197,0.0003353406,0.2679707],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.03447801,0.353657,0.0020733,0.005281301,0.003399492,0.0001091813,0.006653898,0.0005596129,0.5937881],"genre_candidate":"review","genre_consensus":"review","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1109524,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.3711727,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null},{"id":"W2148472277","doi":"10.1017/s0008197303266307","title":"<scp>VICARIOUS LIABILITY IN ENGLAND AND AUSTRALIA</scp>","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"The Cambridge Law Journal","topic":"Legal principles and applications","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":0,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true},"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Tort; Vicarious liability; Law; Commit; Liability; Political science","authors":[{"name":"Nicholas McBride","is_ca":false}],"retraction":null,"screen_n_in":null,"score":{"opus":0.03216145893755584,"gpt":0.3062968282517473,"spread":0.2741353693141914,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline"},"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001821891,0.0002104464,0.0003025422,0.0008856715,0.008484886,0.004642143,0.001249031,0.007261925,0.006158263],"category_scores_gemma":[0.007016924,0.0004561709,0.0003901264,0.0007080009,0.005699645,0.002299452,0.004902192,0.005668303,0.0007004687],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01221083,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.02352079,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.695474,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.8102865,"domain_scores_codex":[0.996506,0.0005615257,0.0001628141,0.0003218709,0.001185963,0.001261876],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9970288,0.0006366567,0.0003378818,0.0001672287,0.0007992851,0.001030109],"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":[0.00007846502,0.0001173534,0.01284176,0.0002482522,0.00003390119,0.005519727,0.04372047,0.0004736161,0.001292733,0.8042566,0.1000113,0.03140586],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00007189866,0.0001320347,0.1202496,0.0007603934,0.0000723347,0.002628185,0.01593601,0.001101529,0.0009717666,0.06911451,0.7887975,0.0001643477],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"other","genre_scores_codex":[0.3368692,0.02318271,0.001742068,0.1274918,0.00105838,0.0002566666,0.0003721734,0.00008078368,0.5089462],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.7714952,0.002906062,0.0009046293,0.04269621,0.0002276714,0.0001250194,0.0001193835,0.00003339314,0.1814924],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":"other","teacher_disagreement_score":0.695474,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6126388,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}