{"id":"W2513997421","doi":"10.3138/utlj.3609","title":"Quantifying <i>Dunsmuir</i>: An empirical analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada’s jurisprudence on standard of review","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"University of Toronto Law Journal","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":5,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Supreme court; Deference; Standard of review; Law; Jurisprudence; Argument (complex analysis); Voting; Political science; Court of record; Original jurisdiction; Medicine","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":true,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0006002954,0.0000504128,0.0003312551,0.0000157442,0.0005234788,0.000002124611,0.0003572439,0.00002686459,0.0004135703],"category_scores_gemma":[0.0001051489,0.00003281773,0.0001779826,0.0001126423,0.000758559,0.0001637672,0.00004559772,0.00004596152,8.967245e-8],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0002991245,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0009023642,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8539605,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9937983,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987243,0.0001853892,0.0001967475,0.0000741268,0.000706813,0.0001126309],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9988873,0.0001122936,0.0003611314,0.0001027909,0.0004663398,0.00007012221],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0008618042,0.000405126,0.2739507,0.0002060941,0.00319852,0.00002347985,0.01654931,0.0001296752,0.001372266,0.6745306,0.01990947,0.008862981],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001544527,0.0008380513,0.4799613,0.005988355,0.004468296,0.000004314278,0.03833311,0.0000154128,0.001360188,0.00178547,0.465191,0.0005099312],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.7600309,0.01794406,0.0009268243,0.02582611,0.0006669376,0.0003950612,0.0005702915,0.00001242807,0.1936274],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9937461,0.006040927,0.00006869484,0.00006666795,0.00002006719,1.409142e-8,1.802465e-7,9.145613e-7,0.00005640971],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.6727452,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.4528305,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.04199834323995864,"score_gpt":0.3078332140184926,"score_spread":0.265834870778534,"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."}}