{"id":"W3125174861","doi":"","title":"Avoiding the Common Wisdom Fallacy: The Role of Social Sciences in Constitutional Adjudication","year":2011,"lang":"en","type":"preprint","venue":"RePEc: Research Papers in Economics","topic":"Judicial and Constitutional Studies","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Adjudication; Margin of appreciation; Fallacy; Argument (complex analysis); Legislator; Political science; Supreme court; Empirical evidence; Law; Constitutional law; Law and economics; Common law; Constitutional review; Order (exchange); Sociology; Politics; Economics; Legislation; Epistemology; Fundamental rights; Human rights","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.1774412,0.00105564,0.003308872,0.009174047,0.01875215,0.02105477,0.004720481,0.02079069,0.003892892],"category_scores_gemma":[0.2497179,0.001242803,0.001794352,0.006506403,0.1274355,0.03912839,0.01529096,0.0267056,0.0006873987],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01442514,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01801289,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01094908,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.01268643,"domain_scores_codex":[0.8248035,0.1353911,0.004668215,0.009625233,0.02148573,0.004026212],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.6449751,0.3189877,0.009704934,0.01384253,0.009576244,0.002913449],"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":[0.00002320748,0.00001236127,0.0004429284,0.00006485048,0.00003063127,0.00007157786,0.002352832,0.0003207683,0.00003087705,0.9884287,0.002105333,0.006115963],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002462012,0.000007940098,0.0001699098,0.0001096125,0.000009854254,0.00001771161,0.0004575564,0.0005710337,0.00005506934,0.9949846,0.003581172,0.00001082423],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"commentary","genre_gemma":"commentary","genre_scores_codex":[0.05050255,0.02084527,0.1338932,0.6241779,0.003543126,0.0002143665,0.000108488,0.0001088621,0.1666063],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9187248,0.004783307,0.02719222,0.04074826,0.004627628,0.0003639921,0.00004208912,0.0001135213,0.003404185],"genre_candidate":"commentary","genre_consensus":"commentary","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1774412,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9384102,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.07628490587999803,"score_gpt":0.3614221169182101,"score_spread":0.2851372110382121,"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."}}