ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2022
Predicting Brazilian Court Decisions.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating AI decision tools in Ecuador's courts: efficiency, consistency, and uncertainty in legal judgments.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
- Behavioral Biases and Judicial Decision-Making in Brazil.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence extracts key insights from legal documents to predict intimate partner femicide.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Impact of System and Diagnostic Errors on Medical Litigation Outcomes: Machine Learning-Based Prediction Models.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Using deep learning to predict outcomes of legal appeals better than human experts: A study with data from Brazilian federal courts.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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 will be unanimous. Our methodology uses various machine learning algorithms, including classifiers and state-of-the-art Deep Learning models. We developed a working prototype whose F1-score performance is ~80.2% by using 4,043 cases from a Brazilian court. To our knowledge, this is the first study to present methods for predicting Brazilian court decision outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.