Predicting Brazilian Court Decisions.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lage-Freitas A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9044329 | biostudies-literature | 2022
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Predicting Brazilian Court Decisions.
Lage-Freitas André A Allende-Cid Héctor H Santana Orivaldo O Oliveira-Lage Lívia L
PeerJ. Computer science 20220325
Predicting case outcomes is useful for legal professionals to understand case law, file a lawsuit, raise a defense, or lodge appeals, for instance. However, it is very hard to predict legal decisions since this requires extracting valuable information from myriads of cases and other documents. Moreover, legal system complexity along with a huge volume of litigation make this problem even harder. This paper introduces an approach to predicting Brazilian court decisions, including whether they wil ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Predicting court rulings has gained attention over the past years. The court rulings are among the most important documents in all legal systems, profoundly impacting the lives of the children in case of divorce or separation. It is evident from literature that Natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) are widely used in the prediction of court rulings. In general, the court decisions comprise several pages and require a lot of space. In addition, extracting valuable information and predicting legal decisions task is difficult. Moreover, the legal system's complexity and massive litigation make this problem more serious. Thus to solve this issue, we propose a new neural network-based model for predicting court decisions on child custody. Our proposed model efficiently performs an efficient search from a massive court decisions database and accurately identifies specific ones that especially deal with copyright claims. More specially, our proposed model performs a careful analysis of court decisions, especially on child custody, and pinpoints the plaintiff's custody request, the court's ruling, and the pivotal arguments. The working mechanism of our proposed model is performed in two phases. In the first phase, the isolation of pertinent sentences within the court ruling encapsulates the essence of the proceedings performed. In the second phase, these documents were annotated independently by using two legal professionals. In this phase, NLP and transformer-based models were employed and thus processed 3,000 annotated court rulings. We have used a massive dataset for the training and refining of our proposed model. The novelty of the proposed model is the integration of bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT) and bidirectional long short-term memory (Bi_LSTM). The traditional methods are primarily based on support vector machines (SVM), and logistic regression. We have performed a comparison with the state-of-the-art model. The efficient results indicate that our proposed model efficiently navigates the complex terrain of legal language and court decision structures. The efficiency of the proposed model is measured in terms of the F1 score. The achieved results show that scores range from 0.66 to 0.93 and Kappa indices from 0.57 to 0.80 across the board. The performance is achieved at times surpassing the inter-annotator agreement, underscoring the model's adeptness at extracting and understanding nuanced legal concepts. The efficient results proved the potential of the proposed neural network model, particularly those based on transformers, to effectively discern and categorize key elements within legal texts, even amidst the intricacies of judicial language and the layered complexity of appellate rulings.
| S-EPMC11622840 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC558002 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It has been widely argued among researchers that the application of big data analytics promises to reduce human bias and provide a scientific and evidence-based approach to the judicial process. In this dataset, historical data consisting of appeal cases presented at the Supreme Court of Nigeria (SCN) were collected from an online repository (Primsol Law Pavillion). A total of 5585 appeal cases brought before the SCN were collected from the archive. The dataset consisted of both criminal and civil appeal cases brought before the SCN. Variables that are related to court case proceedings were identified from related literature, verified by legal experts and used as a basis for generating an electronic structured version of the dataset stored as a spreadsheet file from the unstructured data. From the collected data, thirteen input variables were identified with one output/decision variable. The distribution of the numerical variables was presented as a descriptive statistical summary in terms of the minimum, maximum, mode, mean and standard deviation. The developed dataset can assist researchers to build predictive systems by training their models. Various feature extraction techniques can also be applied on the dataset to remove irrelevant or redundant features for increased performance of such classifiers that are needed to predict the outcome of legal cases.
| S-EPMC10425661 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly proposed to support conservation decision making. However, evidence of SDMs supporting solutions for on-ground conservation problems is still scarce in the scientific literature. Here, we show that successful examples exist but are still largely hidden in the grey literature, and thus less accessible for analysis and learning. Furthermore, the decision framework within which SDMs are used is rarely made explicit. Using case studies from biological invasions, identification of critical habitats, reserve selection and translocation of endangered species, we propose that SDMs may be tailored to suit a range of decision-making contexts when used within a structured and transparent decision-making process. To construct appropriate SDMs to more effectively guide conservation actions, modellers need to better understand the decision process, and decision makers need to provide feedback to modellers regarding the actual use of SDMs to support conservation decisions. This could be facilitated by individuals or institutions playing the role of 'translators' between modellers and decision makers. We encourage species distribution modellers to get involved in real decision-making processes that will benefit from their technical input; this strategy has the potential to better bridge theory and practice, and contribute to improve both scientific knowledge and conservation outcomes.
| S-EPMC4280402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The shortage of intensive care unit (ICU) resources, including equipment and supplies for renal replacement therapy (RRT), is a critical problem in several countries. This study aimed to assess hospital mortality and associated factors in patients treated in public hospitals of the Federal District, Brazil, who requested admission to ICU with renal replacement therapy support (ICU-RRT) in court. Retrospective cohort study that included 883 adult patients treated in public hospitals of the Federal District who requested ICU-RRT admission in court from January 2017 to December 2018. ICU-RRT was denied to 407 patients, which increased mortality (OR 3.33, 95% CI 2.39-4.56, p ≪ 0.01), especially in patients with priority level I/II (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.04, p ≪ 0.01). Of the requests made in court, 450 were filed by patients with priority levels III/IV, and 44.7% of these were admitted to ICU-RRT. In admitted patients, priority level III priority level I/II was associated with a low mortality (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32-0.69, p < 0.01), and not. The admission of patients classified as priority levels III/IV to ICU-RRT considerably jeopardized the admission of patients with priority levels I/II to these settings. The results found open new avenues for organizing public policies and improving ICU-RRT triage.
| S-EPMC8894379 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Health system decision-makers need to understand the value of new technology to make "value for money" decisions. Typically, narrow definitions of value are used. This paper reports on a Canadian Citizens' Jury which was convened to elicit those aspects of value that are important to the public. The criteria used by the public to determine value included those related to the patient, those directly related to caregivers and those directly created for society. Their choices were not binary (e.g., cost vs. health gained), but rather involved multiple factors (e.g., with respect to patient factors: disease severity, health gained with the drug, existence of alternatives, life expectancy, patient age and affordability). Overall, Jurors prioritized funding treatments for ultra-rare disease populations when the treatment offered significant improvements in health and quality of life, and when the pre-treatment health state was considered extremely poor. The prevalence of the disease by itself was not a factor in the choices. Some of the findings differ from previous work, which use survey methods. In our Citizens' Jury, Jurors were able to become more familiar with the question at hand and were exposed to a broad and balanced collection of viewpoints before and throughout engaging in the exercises. This deliberative approach allows for a more nuanced approach to understanding value.
| S-EPMC9819519 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesNumerous technology applications are available that have the potential to improve the quality of life (QoL) of older adults. However, older adults are less likely to adopt new and emerging technologies and reap the potential benefits. This study examines factors that influence older adults' decisions about the adoption of new technology.Research design and methodsFifty-two older adults participated in a mixed-method procedure, which entailed: (1) observing presentations detailing nine differing technologies, (2) assessing the technologies using tailored questionnaires, and (3) participating in focus group discussions. Participants were assigned into one of seven groups separated by age (65-74, 75+) and language (English, Spanish). The outcome was willingness to adopt technology. Predictors included self-assessed abilities (e.g., numeric ability), computer/Internet skills and knowledge, technology readiness, age, language, and technology ratings (e.g., perceived value). Analyses included Spearman's ρ, t-tests, and regression analysis. Focus group discussions were examined for supportive examples.ResultsSelf-assessed abilities and computer/Internet skills were predictive of willingness to adopt technologies although the relationship varied according to the technology examined. Technology readiness, age, and language group showed weak associations with the outcome. Of the technology ratings, perceived value, confidence in ability to learn the technology, and the perceived impact on QoL were the most robust predictors of willingness to adopt technology.Discussion and implicationsFindings indicate that various stakeholders in technology adoption among older adults must be cognizant of a technology's functionality and complexity as well as the characteristics and abilities of older adults. However, certain factors such as perceptions about the value of the technology and potential impact on QoL are also critically important to decisions regarding technology adoption among older people.
| S-EPMC6177084 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSeveral recent US Supreme Court rulings have drawn criticism from the medical community, but their health consequences have not been quantitatively evaluated.ObjectiveTo model health outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022 that invalidated workplace COVID-19 vaccine or mask-and-test requirements, voided state handgun-carry restrictions, and revoked the constitutional right to abortion.Design, setting, and participantsThis decision analytical modeling study estimated outcomes associated with 3 Supreme Court rulings in 2022: (1) National Federation of Independent Business v Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which invalidated COVID-19 workplace protections; (2) New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc v Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police (Bruen), which voided state laws restricting handgun carry; and (3) Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs), which revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Data analysis was performed from July 1, 2022, to April 7, 2023.Main outcomes and measuresFor the OSHA ruling, multiple data sources were used to calculate deaths attributable to COVID-19 among unvaccinated workers from January 4 to May 28, 2022, and the share of these deaths that would have been prevented by the voided protections. To model the Bruen decision, published estimates of the consequences of right-to-carry laws were applied to 2020 firearm-related deaths (and injuries) in 7 affected jurisdictions. For the Dobbs ruling, the model assessed unwanted pregnancy continuations, resulting from the change in distance to the closest abortion facility, and then excess deaths (and peripartum complications) from forcing these unwanted pregnancies to term.ResultsThe decision model projected that the OSHA decision was associated with 1402 additional COVID-19 deaths (and 22 830 hospitalizations) in early 2022. In addition, the model projected that 152 additional firearm-related deaths (and 377 nonfatal injuries) annually will result from the Bruen decision. Finally, the model projected that 30 440 fewer abortions will occur annually due to current abortion bans stemming from Dobbs, with 76 612 fewer abortions if states at high risk for such bans also were to ban the procedure; these bans will be associated with an estimated 6 to 15 additional pregnancy-related deaths each year, respectively, and hundreds of additional cases of peripartum morbidity.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that outcomes from 3 Supreme Court decisions in 2022 could lead to substantial harms to public health, including nearly 3000 excess deaths (and possibly many more) over a decade.
| S-EPMC10251209 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Studying ∼200,000 evictions filed against ∼300,000 Philadelphians from 2005 to 2021, we focus on the role of transit to court in preventing tenants from asserting their rights. In this period, nearly 40% of tenants facing eviction were ordered to leave their residences because they did not show up to contest cases against them and received a default judgment. Controlling for a variety of potential confounds at the tenant and landlord level, we find that residents of private tenancies with longer transit travel time to the courthouse were more likely to default. A 1-h increase in estimated travel time increases the probability of default by between 3.8% and 8.6% points across different model specifications. The effect holds after adjusting for direct distance to the court, unobserved landlord characteristics, and even baseline weekend travel time. However, it is absent in public housing evictions, where timing rules are significantly laxer, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, when tenants had the opportunity to be present virtually. We estimate that had all tenants been equally able to get to the court in 10 min, there would have been 4,000 to 9,000 fewer default evictions over the sample period. We replicate this commuting effect in another dataset of over 800,000 evictions from Harris County, Texas. These results open up a new way to study the physical determinants of access to justice, illustrating that the location and accessibility of a courthouse can affect individual case outcomes. We suggest that increased use of video technology in court may reduce barriers to justice.
| S-EPMC9926236 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC1410865 | biostudies-literature