{"id":"W122484647","doi":"","title":"Rationalizing Similar Facts: A Comment on R. v. Handy","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Criminal Law and Evidence","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"University of Toronto","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Rationalization (economics); Convict; Law; Value (mathematics); Reasonable doubt; Jury; Character (mathematics); Criminal trial; Verdict; Federal Rules of Evidence; Admissible evidence; Psychology; Political science","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["sts"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.00290068,0.00008849065,0.00009905165,0.00004819555,0.001353046,0.0001650037,0.0001793554,0.00004854374,0.0002149664],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0003547307,0.00007867585,0.00007678855,0.0001187027,0.00009022922,0.0002068377,0.000007227428,0.0005899041,0.00007645969],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.001071243,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002508192,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.0003750996,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003811371,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9975613,0.0002808067,0.0001663593,0.0001232861,0.000455698,0.001412517],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9995223,0.0001318628,0.00008380096,0.00008061936,0.00007254146,0.0001089048],"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":[0.00001631965,0.00004412625,0.00030638,0.000001165067,0.00002179137,0.000002889251,0.001357086,0.00002955204,0.00004072159,0.992988,0.003401048,0.001790912],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002078442,0.0001622484,0.00003204938,0.00002333,0.0000138592,0.00002621425,0.008913498,0.000003402392,0.0001159703,0.2512012,0.7391977,0.0001027133],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.2327064,0.0128688,0.02683179,0.4255915,0.00249651,0.0009787376,0.000005982517,0.0002266197,0.2982936],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9926527,0.002156109,0.00006462759,0.002831755,0.0002302919,0.000003381626,7.388939e-7,0.000007862899,0.00205258],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7599462,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9999471,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.03423243833765904,"score_gpt":0.3247244265968774,"score_spread":0.2904919882592184,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}