{"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001409175,0.00008093124,0.00009272729,0.00002006151,0.002088876,0.0002249841,0.0002022791,0.00003548772,0.00009421124],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009285851,0.00005554575,0.00004451026,0.0001761349,0.000188702,0.0002342272,0.00004092772,0.0003245453,0.00008286077],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001483361,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008583684,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001638553,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001448285,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988888,0.0002478866,0.0001948922,0.0001372783,0.0002409037,0.0002902669],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993098,0.00008670353,0.0001073924,0.0001549247,0.0001308645,0.000210364],"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":[0.00001590871,0.0000465018,0.0002874764,0.000002082134,0.00002051811,0.000003346809,0.006691751,0.000006105179,0.0003147164,0.9699997,0.02084848,0.00176337],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001527917,0.00004328773,0.002955984,0.00001443076,0.00002039814,0.00005221197,0.01374302,0.000002634166,0.0002232464,0.001515737,0.9811785,0.00009772451],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4258718,0.0002831024,0.00248194,0.09696639,0.0008773024,0.000842605,0.00001230749,0.00006803572,0.4725965],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9903687,0.0001374831,0.0002329397,0.002992007,0.0003833433,0.00002320499,4.431534e-7,0.000008642686,0.005853211],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.968484,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9992103,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001245048,0.00007622087,0.000110382,0.00001436448,0.002160994,0.0001530019,0.0003914237,0.00004735835,0.00001128575],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004583055,0.00004426749,0.00009073004,0.0001354685,0.0003376335,0.0001251209,0.00008912019,0.0002907213,0.000004609237],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003864216,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00009840675,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.009930403,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00382479,"domain_scores_codex":[0.998888,0.0002071343,0.0002550903,0.00009810585,0.0003185299,0.0002331085],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992199,0.0002555561,0.0002109682,0.0001750707,0.000077944,0.00006054698],"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":[0.000005177409,0.00003150669,0.001549533,0.00000629431,0.00001781005,0.000001718668,0.002037446,0.00008351357,0.0003430495,0.9921691,0.003176635,0.0005782079],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0006984336,0.00003427609,0.03946544,0.0001338001,0.0001635432,0.000100912,0.01132776,0.0006780041,0.001312229,0.02206254,0.9236762,0.0003468864],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.809256,0.000744141,0.0002447216,0.01947081,0.0003143291,0.0001926377,0.00002281071,0.00004696147,0.1697076],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9980108,0.0001073947,0.0004064691,0.0002308322,0.0009817613,0.000003501506,7.849113e-7,0.000008793347,0.0002497294],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9701065,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9991381,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008123582,0.00005970086,0.00008860017,0.000007366576,0.002513084,0.0003786327,0.0003045283,0.00003122583,0.0001840747],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00005784817,0.0000286048,0.0000526347,0.00007495072,0.001540032,0.0002053298,0.00005842655,0.0002828631,0.0002743228],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0000314028,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005519855,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006937664,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003357225,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999182,0.0002104822,0.000131906,0.00007350979,0.0002004405,0.0002016994],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993267,0.0002045708,0.00009696854,0.0001286718,0.0001424442,0.0001006413],"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":[0.000007846692,0.000002756997,0.0002286441,6.377198e-7,0.0000143664,4.953989e-7,0.001260211,6.795534e-7,0.00003125573,0.991281,0.005120812,0.00205133],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001872158,0.00002612725,0.01990094,0.00002307402,0.00007530794,0.0002239373,0.01463028,0.0002882766,0.0001222323,0.09237207,0.870216,0.0002496666],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3418271,0.0002633772,0.00007866911,0.04920714,0.0003316368,0.000403322,0.000006366802,0.0000211206,0.6078613],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9951659,0.0001589484,0.0001105057,0.001109861,0.0008805493,0.00002312553,2.504643e-7,0.000005030549,0.002545852],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8989089,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996752,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0008633755,0.0000477262,0.00009702241,0.00001022016,0.001071115,0.00008897115,0.0001672695,0.00002919075,0.00006247395],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001107392,0.00003265393,0.00007348898,0.0001743453,0.00027583,0.0001017454,0.0000600268,0.0002047206,0.00001542288],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00003983296,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001571202,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0004030298,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001456574,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990882,0.0001788225,0.0001883369,0.00006982029,0.0002949979,0.0001798201],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993368,0.00009781465,0.000134817,0.0001498747,0.0002250076,0.00005566989],"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":[0.000004985698,0.00001907784,0.0001021303,0.000005015729,0.00002217734,0.00002377791,0.002444863,0.000008034171,0.002114391,0.9902815,0.003572006,0.001402021],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001896735,0.00001354604,0.001458994,0.00007347398,0.00004275242,0.0001945579,0.01122919,0.00002393956,0.006369412,0.004472081,0.9758294,0.0001029769],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2356676,0.001440067,0.0005476192,0.0530972,0.0004981528,0.0001715797,0.0000177817,0.00003764415,0.7085224],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9959918,0.000250574,0.0003809153,0.0005258496,0.0006342961,0.000002487076,6.378049e-7,0.000005563688,0.002207822],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9858094,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8238257,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.001991346,0.0001123308,0.0001703905,0.00002047985,0.008447142,0.0001235106,0.0006361897,0.00007323769,0.0003100323],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00001609767,0.00004626339,0.0001384567,0.0002352861,0.003301311,0.0002280715,0.00004739896,0.0004402215,0.00001430481],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001036307,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008434997,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02541522,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05154072,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9980675,0.0004633417,0.0003326053,0.00009701999,0.0007677415,0.0002717806],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989803,0.0003095218,0.0002791748,0.0002044891,0.0001712644,0.00005522122],"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":[0.00001664502,0.00002707994,0.00006164346,0.000001289058,0.0001149493,4.953582e-7,0.002054179,0.00002086195,0.00004639295,0.9965015,0.0009619554,0.0001930308],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001653127,0.00002333938,0.001081306,0.00003874786,0.00006303916,0.000009875482,0.001744386,0.00000122552,0.0002713055,0.5354255,0.4611001,0.00007581339],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2804988,0.001596756,0.00009955879,0.009524754,0.0003221383,0.000239517,0.00001877087,0.00001670093,0.707683],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9981979,0.0001787616,0.000006453114,0.0004333978,0.0006208611,0.000005959485,0.00000314815,0.000003693596,0.0005498876],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7176991,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9994111,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0034019,0.00009492484,0.00009811346,0.00002095577,0.008375708,0.001058863,0.0003073923,0.0000563122,0.000008026854],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0005167435,0.00004201744,0.00009005895,0.0001185413,0.0009118352,0.0005613694,0.00004147933,0.0001829257,0.00001307769],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009961161,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006497329,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.04144673,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01658249,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9985365,0.0005156606,0.0002663932,0.0001097717,0.000286773,0.0002848738],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981439,0.0009221359,0.0002348686,0.0001973155,0.0004175477,0.00008425769],"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":[0.00003977392,0.000008901198,0.00001587651,0.000003008839,0.00001146284,0.000002395515,0.002088525,0.000009367517,0.00001099828,0.9001665,0.08682735,0.01081585],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.002680462,0.00008554404,0.001549615,0.00004341908,0.0002225235,0.001502722,0.03677394,0.004740483,0.00007427031,0.7772967,0.1747735,0.0002568936],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1459497,0.005610839,0.01259951,0.4755689,0.002363766,0.003873705,0.00002183925,0.0001131888,0.3538985],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9946193,0.002049754,0.00009024959,0.0006276245,0.0007491731,0.0001165411,0.000005191439,0.000009947074,0.001732186],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8486696,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999781,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","scholarly_communication"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001212135,0.0002114118,0.000211921,0.000027503,0.005470267,0.003093569,0.0005153521,0.00005919723,0.00001461731],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001456841,0.000117516,0.0000998262,0.00005165172,0.001023173,0.001256752,0.0003096523,0.0003407205,0.000008940979],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006088579,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00002244113,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01519555,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00203758,"domain_scores_codex":[0.998803,0.00003736479,0.0002448321,0.0001754906,0.0002949838,0.0004443487],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990606,0.00004423725,0.0003077929,0.0003771255,0.0001567173,0.00005351219],"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":[0.0001542677,0.0001084383,0.009634721,0.0001456912,0.0002513188,0.00006383689,0.001510017,0.00004374673,0.00006254893,0.9717957,0.009595362,0.006634359],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.009517798,0.0001651193,0.2738817,0.0003689649,0.001255216,0.0004013305,0.08460058,0.003568848,0.0001099074,0.02120213,0.6032586,0.001669867],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8285676,0.0008450806,0.0001054636,0.02157884,0.0009399808,0.0005769405,0.00001856302,0.00004756378,0.14732],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9908211,0.0001691311,0.00002431127,0.007288582,0.001431206,0.000003906732,0.000002021323,0.00001846181,0.0002413127],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9505935,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9979413,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001904416,0.00005447791,0.00009733454,0.0000688957,0.0037751,0.0001118922,0.0002195127,0.0000186099,0.0001482885],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001304913,0.00004551536,0.00005457355,0.0004082872,0.0002415987,0.0001400569,0.000124993,0.0008705633,0.000004272972],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002101027,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00009285077,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02176072,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02530877,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9984229,0.0008017521,0.0001900128,0.00008454471,0.000319325,0.0001814341],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990625,0.0005657225,0.000132217,0.0001170378,0.00006166712,0.00006088769],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"qualitative","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0003196675,0.0002942641,0.01412164,0.00001007224,0.0002437339,0.0001695825,0.449159,0.005956366,0.000100869,0.3522747,0.002010049,0.17534],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001745752,0.0000473607,0.002534564,0.0000388826,0.0001000477,0.0001815883,0.9581189,0.001089639,0.000003969293,0.009429424,0.02816191,0.0001191796],"study_design_candidate":"qualitative","study_design_consensus":"qualitative","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9797018,0.0006628766,0.001135445,0.006993807,0.0002185345,0.00007180684,0.000006021295,0.00001186171,0.01119781],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9981371,0.0005362981,0.0003643893,0.0006213565,0.0001154387,0.000006489216,0.000001241168,0.000005243152,0.0002124664],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5089599,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975219,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003507002,0.0001178804,0.0001296627,0.00003820829,0.001147267,0.0005249376,0.0002257231,0.00002712927,0.0001348696],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006105404,0.0000800915,0.00003398072,0.00009528791,0.00008581067,0.001055733,0.0001204727,0.0002611047,0.00002425507],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00006341759,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00005392557,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.5753902,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.3814586,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990804,0.00001657241,0.0002205128,0.00007644713,0.0003268348,0.000279194],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994879,0.00002969651,0.0002282534,0.0001328086,0.00008087089,0.00004049324],"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":[0.0000166334,0.00003820007,0.02606512,0.00001691668,0.00003309923,0.000004773635,0.00004786768,0.00003132454,0.00008036721,0.7566783,0.2161662,0.0008211731],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004487402,0.000002385193,0.1117623,0.00001657276,0.00002694271,0.00002319864,0.0001794657,0.0003835028,0.00003042502,0.0001762339,0.8868399,0.0001102942],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6399592,0.002287147,0.0002631995,0.02070541,0.002553479,0.0002121249,0.00001674343,0.00006344227,0.3339392],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.976907,0.000008727639,0.00003427118,0.01838566,0.004154287,0.000002946746,0.000008514044,0.000009636907,0.0004889678],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.7565021,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8823968,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002201929,0.00009138923,0.0001522061,0.00002515641,0.001203487,0.0001416383,0.0005413918,0.00005175523,0.0001552819],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003170132,0.0000490956,0.00007664083,0.0002292553,0.0005710666,0.0002882512,0.00005180114,0.0004931305,0.00002097555],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007332578,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003943413,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.02369014,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.05125151,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982473,0.0004758864,0.0002882372,0.000101445,0.0005542701,0.0003329246],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988484,0.0006293887,0.0001666926,0.0001880927,0.00008519252,0.00008220239],"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":[0.000229128,0.0004837634,0.06129339,0.00007619488,0.0001388135,0.001058419,0.07741639,0.0003494947,0.0007224526,0.5252715,0.2136661,0.1192944],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007346732,0.0003507214,0.03703982,0.0003979142,0.0001602864,0.001302599,0.08874144,0.0004185934,0.0002561364,0.002029329,0.8680511,0.0005173794],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8888802,0.001682617,0.00001965447,0.03824927,0.000549677,0.0001293231,0.000008693135,0.000016191,0.07046439],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9965677,0.0004124846,0.00001434804,0.0003482224,0.0006834335,0.00000266707,2.353619e-7,0.000007545162,0.0019634],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.654385,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9828112,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009082227,0.00006503565,0.0001136826,0.000006859737,0.001336882,0.0002259532,0.0002558109,0.0000313919,0.00002605987],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000254532,0.00003229002,0.00004840693,0.0000780218,0.002014026,0.0002225166,0.00007064048,0.0002104509,0.000008774665],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00001504035,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000342551,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01617423,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001386222,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991946,0.0001730693,0.0001640705,0.00007568164,0.000212566,0.0001800623],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993698,0.0001977825,0.0001121319,0.0001306457,0.00007367925,0.0001159615],"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":[0.00001021678,0.000008365399,0.00009527994,0.000002511309,0.00001640898,4.551117e-7,0.001810366,0.000002328837,0.00009591206,0.9936621,0.003308094,0.0009879739],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00171155,0.0000487226,0.004632402,0.00004345949,0.000102067,0.00009825711,0.01507505,0.000203044,0.0003026514,0.05155934,0.9260111,0.0002123009],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4940822,0.0012082,0.00013748,0.1203393,0.000154615,0.0004778002,0.000013285,0.00002304108,0.3835641],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9971922,0.0003955663,0.00005640035,0.001490774,0.0002839855,0.000007947885,3.317507e-7,0.000005637141,0.0005671705],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9421027,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999632,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001250113,0.00004428461,0.0000671661,0.00001840445,0.0008097814,0.0001752823,0.0002705357,0.0000346283,0.00002280819],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009570287,0.00003047784,0.00003258545,0.00008569835,0.0001562355,0.0002159571,0.00002049074,0.0002132217,0.00003524919],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005532068,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000357994,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002227049,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003711964,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991931,0.000215298,0.0001459837,0.00006276874,0.0001989999,0.0001838493],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995136,0.0001695947,0.00008827013,0.00010401,0.00005344971,0.00007111367],"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":[0.000004406505,0.00002548723,0.0003702843,8.998092e-7,0.00000237504,0.000001956419,0.001267059,0.00002526466,0.0005502529,0.9893418,0.001657189,0.006753023],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002448744,0.00001101953,0.01358912,0.00001718106,0.000006133569,0.00001300908,0.0007872327,0.0001405763,0.0002693222,0.00400638,0.9808462,0.00006889947],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4961203,0.00008951289,0.0009208854,0.01979019,0.0002878676,0.0001897518,0.000003404269,0.00003048204,0.4825675],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9978098,0.00005029185,0.0000644071,0.0007104392,0.000662418,0.000007034351,5.47174e-7,0.000004446228,0.0006906533],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9853354,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6228266,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006851994,0.00007456051,0.00008863384,0.00001251495,0.001695618,0.00009456844,0.0001263329,0.0000310662,0.0002444149],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004938067,0.00005117508,0.00004519112,0.00005269838,0.0009424379,0.0001068247,0.00001166269,0.0002412355,0.00002389649],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009338232,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002806527,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001997421,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003569856,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9990024,0.0002480165,0.0001154946,0.00008046011,0.0002905393,0.0002630988],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994426,0.0001702941,0.00007399459,0.00009368895,0.00003922348,0.0001802197],"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":[0.000008415234,0.00001445613,0.0002193502,7.288969e-7,0.00001370909,0.00001471319,0.0001556516,0.00000242915,0.000003288469,0.9892046,0.009797519,0.0005650943],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001698662,0.00004430288,0.0003443794,0.00001591839,0.00002001518,0.000149649,0.001390734,0.000001349997,0.00003762157,0.01454535,0.9831893,0.00009146169],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1186968,0.0003255573,0.00004040019,0.002623566,0.000318278,0.00006560847,0.00002347234,0.00001369906,0.8778926],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.99392,0.0002552287,0.00007036785,0.003936866,0.0004929825,0.000001220917,0.000001214862,0.000005010395,0.001317116],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9746593,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999604,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.005863498,0.00009516058,0.0002393071,0.00002838083,0.0007073325,0.00001004181,0.0005562141,0.0001221228,0.001310784],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002821869,0.00004393117,0.0001005127,0.0003778622,0.0003587353,0.0001165868,0.0001514874,0.00214591,0.0001601705],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001332073,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002196138,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002216415,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001556282,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9957732,0.002606366,0.0007351412,0.0001243374,0.0003855958,0.0003753354],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9969127,0.001847952,0.0003702238,0.0005905608,0.0001567144,0.0001218466],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"not_applicable","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001346554,0.0008089257,0.6943831,0.0002805477,0.00008778885,0.00007184367,0.01007003,0.00002340568,0.002939949,0.1829541,0.1032582,0.003775571],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001015655,0.00009362047,0.3496849,0.0003737417,0.00003789762,0.0000627154,0.004703312,0.00008126903,0.0003330121,0.004503382,0.6390018,0.0001086761],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8306383,0.0001638997,0.00001307109,0.06700122,0.0006319721,0.0003385535,0.000002905683,0.00001301617,0.1011971],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9948286,0.0001466243,0.0000269623,0.002439789,0.0004869169,0.00001063795,4.332335e-7,0.000008791822,0.002051178],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.5357436,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9996021,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000537646,0.00004947917,0.0000647721,0.00001050781,0.003714978,0.00008701621,0.0003690786,0.00003084409,0.0001317861],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002550835,0.00003201814,0.00007230224,0.0001225861,0.0003962964,0.0001458963,0.00003089069,0.0002516995,0.0002124924],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005579898,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001030774,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002072401,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0008052013,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992137,0.00009955524,0.0001260827,0.00006457343,0.0002708225,0.0002252953],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995494,0.00005793858,0.00006679916,0.0001336295,0.0000620225,0.0001302428],"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":[0.000003767087,0.00001958669,0.0002053677,4.145535e-7,0.000008075815,0.00001539189,0.00222297,0.000006783989,0.0000498373,0.9671909,0.02918745,0.001089441],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001169494,0.000008551197,0.002995478,0.000003344512,0.000006876013,0.0001881577,0.0008190302,0.00001445285,0.00006901681,0.001028106,0.994689,0.00006100396],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2271394,0.0001987769,0.0002234471,0.02153612,0.0002614256,0.0001035638,0.000004614061,0.00004135568,0.7504913],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9914916,0.0002175916,0.00008546947,0.001042089,0.001259024,0.000003940506,4.221059e-7,0.000005834437,0.005894003],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9661628,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975821,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001295479,0.0001238427,0.0001827271,0.00003235275,0.001053818,0.0004094529,0.0005817302,0.00005028714,0.0002250986],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001285244,0.00008028172,0.0002013231,0.0003467545,0.000163905,0.0001064481,0.0001153154,0.0002389185,0.001795665],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001402763,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00002144668,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0002921447,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0002441392,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9988269,0.00003893252,0.0004887428,0.0001537713,0.00009101797,0.000400611],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992164,0.00007644405,0.0002776728,0.0002748401,0.00004746663,0.0001072079],"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":[0.00003944714,0.000006915449,0.009244574,0.000001383291,0.00003439976,0.00001584955,0.0000301794,0.00002440121,9.549365e-7,0.7805398,0.2066382,0.003423921],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.000312868,0.00002926905,0.1771859,0.00001085789,0.000005602003,0.0001740453,0.000149843,0.0006797471,0.00000415531,0.05277923,0.7685519,0.000116507],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.166161,0.003035969,0.001067069,0.01596227,0.005222341,0.0001869614,0.0002004622,0.00009075674,0.8080732],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9854469,0.0005269631,0.00001600532,0.0008806961,0.0005397329,0.000005667252,0.00000199357,0.00001193746,0.01257008],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8192859,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9989815,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":["sts"],"category_scores_codex":[0.00236817,0.0001363475,0.0001742557,0.000009252287,0.01226141,0.0009671108,0.000763801,0.00005056096,0.000237324],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003413489,0.0000450164,0.000128437,0.0001000554,0.00364338,0.0002722738,0.00005914918,0.0005812004,0.0000634852],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00004323518,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006835591,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.004980514,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001584108,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9979867,0.0007793873,0.0002445936,0.0001120048,0.0004854595,0.0003918418],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989982,0.000407503,0.00009412727,0.0002600361,0.00007809297,0.0001620069],"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":[0.0001509988,0.00001278105,0.00000384006,0.000001487746,0.00003224445,0.00001124504,0.004025527,0.000004694249,0.000009312351,0.9794748,0.006641568,0.009631538],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0007155358,0.00002153177,0.00007925108,0.00002666672,0.00002348144,0.00005978812,0.001208276,0.00006420451,0.00002673195,0.01716828,0.9805074,0.0000988827],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.02272781,0.00292819,0.0000018318,0.1495748,0.000269359,0.0001821133,0.000005085453,0.00003064547,0.8242802],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9589634,0.003735567,0.000009542438,0.005506251,0.001787024,0.000006873173,7.049292e-7,0.0000120862,0.02997854],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9738658,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9990681,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001613603,0.00006045323,0.0000843194,0.00002224402,0.001111973,0.0002016746,0.0003793906,0.00004350234,0.00002887168],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002610246,0.00004227113,0.0000330026,0.0001494192,0.0002280892,0.0002832149,0.00001779593,0.0003463157,0.00010924],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003679553,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0006555825,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8518094,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9644299,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989976,0.0001126497,0.0001536007,0.00007187873,0.0002434832,0.0004207934],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991989,0.00003742597,0.00006231214,0.0001257049,0.00008485965,0.0004908221],"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":[0.000004247335,0.0000106901,0.003618392,5.733648e-7,0.000004006158,0.000008590097,0.001523576,0.00004965534,0.000003944271,0.9929357,0.001256033,0.0005846233],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002470067,0.00001665703,0.01089509,0.000009887015,0.000005441618,0.00003397701,0.001107094,0.0001385642,0.00001952961,0.0006170205,0.9868332,0.00007651992],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2543589,0.0001157942,0.000006238992,0.01513811,0.0001792373,0.000112738,0.000008457296,0.0000111098,0.7300693],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9969338,0.0000480772,0.00002563555,0.001563533,0.0005331492,0.000005619858,0.000001037069,0.000006235462,0.0008829589],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9923186,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8552513,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.004226878,0.0002064246,0.0003198553,0.0001409151,0.001366791,0.0003581665,0.000255669,0.00006905026,0.00003308387],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002723074,0.00009795335,0.0001668675,0.000561639,0.0006779693,0.0004080912,0.0001280578,0.0009728018,0.00004562935],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003045787,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002659391,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002256894,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003666065,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9980154,0.0004713628,0.0005092965,0.0002609052,0.0002965751,0.0004464752],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9981616,0.0007588112,0.0001959116,0.0005554558,0.0001615037,0.0001667878],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"not_applicable","study_design_gemma":"qualitative","study_design_scores_codex":[0.004485016,0.0004490576,0.0005250085,0.0002374903,0.001014002,0.001321585,0.2223608,0.0005378728,0.001287505,0.08968654,0.4279976,0.2500976],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.02475612,0.0006297087,0.008781885,0.0007241893,0.001437077,0.1137809,0.4302928,0.02534097,0.004048982,0.01723767,0.3721553,0.0008143847],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.6905562,0.001103002,0.00003265603,0.3035907,0.001222319,0.001260217,0.00004917692,0.00007557026,0.002110137],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9874904,0.001357539,0.00003059129,0.003159969,0.002596728,0.000119777,0.0000106636,0.00004288225,0.005191497],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3004307,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999333,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0003751271,0.0001413722,0.0001240129,0.0000237747,0.0011449,0.0006106872,0.0007373578,0.00002841269,0.0003272859],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0002080267,0.00007556756,0.00008108083,0.0001492381,0.0002577265,0.0004173135,0.00008268166,0.0003658361,0.0001703348],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007360382,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00003256041,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.1547237,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.184072,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987581,0.00001711877,0.0002892678,0.0001198379,0.0005075113,0.0003081376],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991301,0.0001922412,0.000228921,0.000235889,0.0001915832,0.00002122427],"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":[0.000005252419,0.00003150305,0.0009986366,0.000009818109,0.00003079645,0.00004640003,0.00002043711,0.0001214999,0.000053047,0.3158947,0.682067,0.0007209072],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001932579,0.000007436638,0.002201154,0.00003258113,0.00004637051,0.0001881279,0.0002083489,0.002902659,0.00006091223,0.00195607,0.9920526,0.000150527],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.01315386,0.001170593,0.0002965692,0.06300961,0.003724781,0.0001917247,0.00002225062,0.0000595633,0.918371],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9659777,0.0001205162,0.00001262541,0.0240975,0.006391081,0.000003273355,0.000002977734,0.00001782779,0.003376475],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9528239,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8805763,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001449018,0.00007408555,0.00009677368,0.000005810566,0.001711051,0.0003882677,0.0005165428,0.00008659984,0.0001240802],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00004606703,0.00004624851,0.00009403118,0.0002613859,0.0004390368,0.000376749,0.00003748194,0.0004383095,0.00004444744],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001277011,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001013843,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002889371,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.008171616,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986693,0.0002964662,0.0001839076,0.00008564584,0.000390356,0.0003743527],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995666,0.0000819569,0.00009474016,0.0001103919,0.00006887291,0.00007741489],"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":[0.000004638365,0.00003863188,0.002028649,0.000001391184,0.000007139989,0.00001450756,0.003684928,0.00001126653,0.00004390559,0.9177691,0.07602204,0.0003738049],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002623018,0.000008440357,0.004153228,0.00001219632,0.000006009966,0.00003743828,0.005673762,0.000004919456,0.0000384564,0.01306545,0.9766468,0.00009097339],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.286316,0.001023773,0.00001702427,0.04241214,0.0004716791,0.0001072278,0.000002612395,0.00003986419,0.6696097],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9916762,0.0002767812,0.00006347676,0.000890423,0.001571237,0.000003347486,0.000001213491,0.000006261794,0.005511058],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9047036,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9995886,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001101121,0.00006944574,0.00007663065,0.00001504365,0.00255353,0.000245034,0.0004146959,0.0000364989,0.00005894686],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002895341,0.00004496722,0.00008117853,0.0001698141,0.0002168302,0.0001728441,0.00004575943,0.0003012899,0.0001233173],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001123368,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0000884946,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001903033,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003265705,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989158,0.0001327756,0.0001979993,0.00009207879,0.0003467235,0.0003146595],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993999,0.00005792574,0.0001097337,0.0001925089,0.00008202785,0.0001578959],"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":[0.00001254845,0.00003903257,0.0001262396,9.47725e-7,0.00001539846,0.00002419802,0.00130425,0.00004739125,0.0001168332,0.9534841,0.03891442,0.005914636],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001637432,0.00001415151,0.0005372665,0.00001003433,0.00001035517,0.00003526255,0.001419745,0.00002620732,0.00002910547,0.002273386,0.9954103,0.0000704783],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.09607934,0.0003641991,0.000699401,0.06659446,0.0003363049,0.0002260886,0.000006165963,0.00005315742,0.8356409],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9890362,0.001562107,0.0001186656,0.002997983,0.001143124,0.0000106918,0.00000164628,0.000008913737,0.005120678],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9564958,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.998745,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00096123,0.00008650787,0.0001045467,0.00001694604,0.002501247,0.000300765,0.0005719789,0.00004861067,0.0003109035],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00009188597,0.00005996077,0.00009654601,0.0002577538,0.0002128946,0.0001686818,0.00003872809,0.0003284068,0.001270646],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00009407198,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001025748,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00426356,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002060983,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987671,0.0001760773,0.0001773631,0.0001260321,0.0003645964,0.0003887869],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991142,0.0001848455,0.00006467418,0.0002252406,0.00008725765,0.0003237871],"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":[0.000005405561,0.00004289729,0.0001580726,0.000001046602,0.00002110584,0.00001192799,0.004872522,0.00006876848,0.0000885641,0.7846013,0.1988739,0.01125452],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001010748,0.00001816308,0.002983146,0.000009631714,0.00001425561,0.0000417759,0.001627402,0.000009456407,0.00007166953,0.001393826,0.9936917,0.00003785878],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2238417,0.0001226133,0.0001114409,0.02034096,0.0001447213,0.0001770272,0.00001699278,0.00004379539,0.7552007],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9501119,0.0002195683,0.0002117788,0.003005419,0.001475582,0.00001274426,0.000001055168,0.0000117767,0.04495016],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7948179,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.999507,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002469299,0.00008986972,0.000118222,0.00001343901,0.004274584,0.0005360567,0.0004048235,0.00005319194,0.0003402119],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0006463872,0.00004572122,0.00006912008,0.0001936252,0.001506718,0.0004705304,0.00003472859,0.0005559547,0.0001648319],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00005669809,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00009809169,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002872388,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001588721,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981614,0.0008205202,0.0001775603,0.0001086548,0.0004389769,0.0002929052],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986982,0.000766912,0.0001145919,0.0001748362,0.0001215321,0.0001239508],"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":[0.0002364385,0.00005714358,0.00007389176,0.000004210895,0.00009539695,0.00002830379,0.118058,0.00001374936,0.000004020941,0.8342785,0.03295206,0.01419824],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003639158,0.00001307497,0.0001661433,0.00001383763,0.00007472037,0.0002532858,0.006440028,0.00001666707,0.00000418342,0.002508396,0.9900724,0.00007335408],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0139845,0.006124808,0.00001016256,0.0653379,0.0003489095,0.0002017027,0.000005128693,0.00005242449,0.9139345],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9791611,0.002326895,0.0001432773,0.002306812,0.001563662,0.000010944,2.725148e-7,0.0000113662,0.01447571],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9651766,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9970217,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001131657,0.0001113905,0.0001578617,0.000008959689,0.002953515,0.0002579431,0.00034363,0.00003845426,0.00001591009],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001726796,0.00005398568,0.00003919252,0.0001323922,0.0004354047,0.0001963059,0.0000618313,0.0003784185,0.0000115168],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0009049273,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003488476,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.9889892,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9981495,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9982594,0.0003806539,0.0002328387,0.0001101455,0.0005820886,0.0004349276],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990059,0.0003484524,0.0001277522,0.0001067927,0.0001709553,0.000240111],"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":[0.0001498842,0.00007002682,0.1128543,0.00001301327,0.0003808101,0.000264672,0.06360819,0.00001391697,0.0001086831,0.1179174,0.6907406,0.01387846],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004436116,0.00001359783,0.1665825,0.000022764,0.00001843633,0.00003345871,0.008626424,0.00002025576,0.00003039376,0.0003336432,0.8237451,0.0001298484],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8845828,0.002058556,0.000001142961,0.06250445,0.0009418184,0.0002021108,0.000007677108,0.00001306824,0.04968835],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9958303,0.000132303,0.00001142525,0.001297688,0.0005796436,0.000005380477,3.212765e-7,0.000004640818,0.002138297],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1330044,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9983445,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001153283,0.0001245144,0.0001441628,0.0000252223,0.003465582,0.0007007018,0.0008291163,0.00008763565,0.00005842307],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001302008,0.00008284707,0.0001333217,0.0002951203,0.0003196974,0.0003894686,0.00009104764,0.0005952208,0.0001835291],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001109193,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00008288112,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002953477,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.002378646,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9983783,0.0002011329,0.0002056134,0.0001621317,0.0005410751,0.0005117638],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9989154,0.0002148509,0.0001706077,0.0003104923,0.0001251004,0.0002635841],"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":[0.000003079672,0.00006718492,0.0004806914,0.000001822264,0.00003073528,0.00002852139,0.005751044,0.00003633357,0.000171811,0.8941462,0.09725918,0.002023399],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002261877,0.00002346915,0.001720388,0.0000110599,0.00002708473,0.0001182614,0.0063734,0.00005935125,0.00006761758,0.002999312,0.9883182,0.00005565528],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.3924833,0.0003409814,0.0002905024,0.04670265,0.0004793344,0.0002051778,0.000009554234,0.00008817553,0.5594003],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.953738,0.0007535897,0.00008422421,0.002354139,0.002552033,0.000008524187,0.000002034239,0.00001733429,0.04049011],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8911469,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9978318,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts","insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.000883389,0.0002337453,0.000282458,0.00008577023,0.001470115,0.000413025,0.0008394351,0.00006072894,0.009469731],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00003211384,0.000138693,0.0001078526,0.0003997739,0.0001912665,0.0003854729,0.0004205127,0.00150926,0.0002496448],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0003391163,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001037545,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.7928729,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.5857748,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9981356,0.0001269811,0.000413738,0.000308949,0.0005387015,0.0004759987],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992043,0.0001433037,0.000204547,0.0003508598,0.00007049386,0.00002644175],"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":[0.0006518632,0.0001984536,0.001291461,0.0000218228,0.00006652965,0.0005064955,0.00006781863,0.00009355987,0.000513133,0.2124652,0.7828763,0.001247372],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0008481508,0.00005913057,0.004497523,0.00006616932,0.00004972934,0.0001700401,0.0005039301,0.001425865,0.0006091144,0.01717998,0.9741558,0.0004345702],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4063594,0.0001289406,0.0000102113,0.04062238,0.000515636,0.0003042337,0.00002073432,0.00005716824,0.5519813],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.973307,0.000006717036,0.000009993595,0.02513165,0.000504963,0.0000316236,0.00001965212,0.000026369,0.0009620837],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.5669475,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998298,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0014551,0.00007916107,0.0001185479,0.0000158306,0.003735842,0.0002417008,0.0003875744,0.00003241795,0.0001652954],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00006628848,0.00005426366,0.0001075286,0.0001607993,0.0003422572,0.0001892873,0.00003144012,0.0003821073,0.0001090672],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007613726,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001717613,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.006599629,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.005733663,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9986293,0.0004670332,0.0001825148,0.00009422613,0.0002895283,0.0003373805],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991427,0.0002351564,0.0001126188,0.0002281593,0.00007547804,0.000205894],"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":[0.000002966913,0.00002750368,0.0001540676,0.000001076801,0.00003710838,0.00002829799,0.0005763657,0.000012203,0.0000249689,0.9839035,0.01493943,0.0002924894],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001883727,0.00001831513,0.0003667528,0.000004556616,0.00009136565,0.0003584056,0.002150237,0.000004653983,0.00008671699,0.002723054,0.9939114,0.00009616184],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.093288,0.0009959921,0.0003270782,0.02408922,0.000353968,0.0002363571,0.00002248639,0.00005721554,0.8806297],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9943626,0.0002111758,0.0001771826,0.002423997,0.0004776085,0.000006171122,0.000001199295,0.000009939633,0.002330161],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9811805,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9976709,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001337243,0.00006998111,0.00008441761,0.000009901642,0.00370553,0.0003389726,0.0005223784,0.0000350136,0.00001720845],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00008493069,0.00003044361,0.00008246103,0.0001018543,0.000437089,0.0001603957,0.00005114751,0.0003095352,0.00001169857],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002413117,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008759559,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.3139987,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.4951921,"domain_scores_codex":[0.999082,0.0002165023,0.0002147117,0.00007792082,0.000162488,0.000246391],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9990358,0.0001516949,0.0001438747,0.0002860835,0.0001142237,0.0002682686],"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":[0.000006904704,0.000008098496,0.0008100843,0.00000186904,0.00006677196,7.741604e-7,0.01140835,0.0006000516,0.00001914088,0.5449123,0.4383135,0.003852094],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00009390969,0.000007265875,0.001466553,0.00001681377,0.00005389746,0.00002614473,0.002780258,0.00004889156,0.000006962523,0.004195564,0.9912555,0.00004825294],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1876392,0.003940539,0.0000988075,0.5384721,0.002788441,0.001211771,0.0002065906,0.00003973951,0.2656029],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9786112,0.0004987735,0.00001054452,0.0006289105,0.001225637,0.000009228532,0.000001059202,0.000007138126,0.01900748],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7909721,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9975915,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002006649,0.00004047328,0.00007567091,0.00006033038,0.002811377,0.0002210737,0.0002932526,0.00002340334,0.00002892329],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00007916864,0.00002961746,0.00004137329,0.0001735234,0.0005416315,0.00007148401,0.00001087268,0.0003041806,0.000003684234],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002344408,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002463488,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.998702,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9999878,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989152,0.0001431111,0.0002059492,0.00004803357,0.0003942444,0.000293441],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993333,0.0002755169,0.0001303361,0.000102558,0.00004683036,0.0001115166],"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":[0.0000834915,0.00002672471,0.002261224,0.000006210308,0.00002974773,0.000267696,0.005984749,0.00006922392,0.0001104293,0.7346026,0.145402,0.1111559],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0001022883,0.000008327942,0.02366688,0.00002849511,0.000005132021,0.00001442524,0.00491438,0.000004046248,0.00002814793,0.0002439096,0.9709345,0.00004948472],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.4416074,0.001424409,0.00003777525,0.02451229,0.00266752,0.000117799,0.000008200428,0.000007269651,0.5296174],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9975272,0.0001344934,0.000004266626,0.000531568,0.0003647139,3.217488e-7,9.992639e-8,0.000004230205,0.001433106],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.8255325,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9984868,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0007300785,0.00009295075,0.0001151729,0.00001530967,0.001474878,0.0003293323,0.0003305299,0.00005693959,0.00005363049],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0000624185,0.00005628292,0.00007020381,0.0001041755,0.0002520854,0.000191536,0.00003170574,0.0002286267,0.00008865142],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007196408,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0001451788,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002061408,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001463492,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989425,0.0000894586,0.0001923622,0.0001409853,0.0003084948,0.0003261829],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9992312,0.0002491914,0.00008365377,0.0001474543,0.0000845289,0.0002040203],"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":[0.0001426432,0.0002301266,0.0005581313,0.00003225424,0.0001722449,0.00005243747,0.03199932,0.0003540084,0.001401851,0.6966636,0.1593035,0.1090899],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0003794591,0.00005614351,0.00126306,0.00001328633,0.00003439501,0.0000467072,0.007973916,0.0001020076,0.00009801052,0.0009978252,0.9889826,0.00005260237],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.660632,0.0007823945,0.0003634684,0.007663708,0.0001972557,0.0006642392,0.00006648456,0.00003694133,0.3295935],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9682253,0.0008188551,0.0002380928,0.001123238,0.0007243692,0.00001401223,0.000001600606,0.00001362265,0.02884088],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.8296791,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998251,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0009605369,0.00009036573,0.0002764936,0.00001965174,0.001105015,0.00007779279,0.0003190135,0.00004395951,0.00003543084],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00002602353,0.00005952458,0.0001726711,0.00007218063,0.000284856,0.00008393748,0.00003384392,0.0002125682,0.0001711311],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0001624906,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00001214439,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.002356158,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.0003389791,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989845,0.00002588793,0.0006153884,0.0001013393,0.00003938127,0.0002335249],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9991267,0.000157169,0.000458571,0.0001811236,0.0000388116,0.00003766383],"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":[0.00001026648,0.00001775932,0.00152779,0.000002751266,0.00004206611,0.000001658079,0.0001561695,0.00002208351,0.000003092955,0.9531457,0.04480708,0.0002636101],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002893926,0.00003032075,0.008123819,0.000006422503,0.000008572531,0.00001987609,0.0002172917,0.00006529005,0.00001096069,0.0361952,0.9549217,0.0001111861],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.1669144,0.02440887,0.00102846,0.006152244,0.002318593,0.0001614455,0.00009105,0.00002076865,0.7989042],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9897929,0.0009467315,0.00001802125,0.0003485198,0.0007113083,0.00000417507,7.887579e-7,0.00001202803,0.008165507],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.9169505,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8498993,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001225007,0.0002865205,0.000340049,0.00002567908,0.00141832,0.0005136606,0.0004862297,0.0001913412,0.00002171233],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001606556,0.0002394105,0.00006798987,0.0003627487,0.0007001733,0.0008453878,0.0001508392,0.0007214286,0.000005248802],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000135438,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0002068651,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0179908,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006492205,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9976497,0.000371232,0.0003582894,0.0004108699,0.0004552547,0.0007547109],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9980635,0.0003862111,0.0005548355,0.0002429314,0.00007146097,0.000681054],"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":[0.00002588848,0.0001098052,0.07219135,0.00003253229,0.00008977108,0.00007418142,0.003440032,0.00006823856,0.0003027989,0.3280195,0.5949556,0.0006903425],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00110595,0.00005248471,0.01972187,0.00004382313,0.00005312007,0.0001022726,0.002659014,0.00003701935,0.0001014916,0.00199821,0.9740174,0.0001072777],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.924738,0.003605688,0.00008175348,0.002939591,0.0001876281,0.0005070533,0.0002113409,0.00004448296,0.06768449],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9060211,0.03588747,0.0001983052,0.0006121984,0.0003048197,0.000004468527,0.000009732024,0.00002910553,0.05693275],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.3790618,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9998817,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001496533,0.0002664611,0.0005183948,0.00003204688,0.003271931,0.0002391324,0.00130096,0.0002004102,0.0001600977],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003031477,0.0002220977,0.0004436342,0.0005434776,0.001237552,0.0006105497,0.0003445025,0.0008769148,0.00001077837],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.002048698,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.000424279,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.03850146,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.00639693,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9969998,0.0005644691,0.0004409842,0.0003525873,0.0008548403,0.0007873264],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9979426,0.0002385313,0.0002941884,0.0003562555,0.0007006807,0.0004676899],"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":[0.000044968,0.00007629482,0.000178404,0.00001267161,0.0001109956,0.000008374371,0.00322456,0.000004986804,0.00001711444,0.3330341,0.6630288,0.0002587561],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004426376,0.00007718877,0.0001194498,0.00003971976,0.0000900048,0.000002235637,0.004360057,0.000004580793,0.00003196937,0.00004239254,0.9945505,0.0002392532],"study_design_candidate":"not_applicable","study_design_consensus":"not_applicable","genre_codex":"other","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.007458264,0.01060168,0.0001309246,0.01587279,0.004556558,0.0003469093,0.0001176297,0.0001022873,0.9608129],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6897417,0.00980601,0.0002734934,0.008470678,0.003484155,0.00001016412,0.00001130866,0.00005615499,0.2881463],"genre_candidate":"other","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.6822834,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9980257,"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":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001769171,0.00006907093,0.00009981281,0.00001639462,0.0009046585,0.0001942208,0.0001940529,0.00005568864,0.00001996686],"category_scores_gemma":[0.000240603,0.00004812219,0.00003960887,0.0001544893,0.0003320587,0.000127935,0.00002370815,0.00037595,0.00002070285],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00007091129,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00006824177,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.005414701,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01288815,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989265,0.0003076388,0.000178013,0.0001113578,0.0001939002,0.0002825909],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9993332,0.0002641523,0.00006861475,0.0001389009,0.00004648086,0.0001486568],"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":[0.000001658237,0.00004517053,0.0282506,0.000002850837,0.000008100822,0.000008720479,0.005825443,0.00001642534,0.00006663339,0.9640961,0.001205839,0.0004724259],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002844837,0.00001295711,0.04636838,0.000005582446,0.000009253669,0.00003495335,0.001059038,0.000005616496,0.00006723159,0.00547265,0.9466478,0.0000320895],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8793205,0.0001483812,0.00003268783,0.001791211,0.0001073502,0.0001299249,0.000004522152,0.00001133714,0.1184541],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9968262,0.0001265461,0.00008382047,0.0002048697,0.0002192131,0.000005770156,3.306892e-7,0.000004695446,0.002528533],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.9586235,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8185444,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"labels":[],"label_agreement":null}]}