Similar Cases

Multi-factor similarity search using provision overlap, semantic similarity, and outcome alignment.

Select Source Case
Source Case: Competence To Perform Foundation Design

Case Number: 94-8

Year: 1994

Found 10 Similar Cases

Ranked by weighted similarity score
Matching Methods:
Cosine Semantic embedding similarity Jaccard Set intersection / union Categorical Exact match scoring
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
46%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
89%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
56%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
38%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.2 II.2 II.2.a +2

Topics: Competence Qualifications for Work Signing Plans/Documents

Citations: 78-5, 71-2

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Cites Source 61% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
57%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
59%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
75%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
43%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.2 II.2 II.2.a +3

Topics: Plans/Specifications Duty to the Public Signing Plans/Documents +2

Citations: 78-5, 71-2

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
58%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
67%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
60%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
50%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.2 II.1.a II.2 +3

Topics: Competence Qualifications for Work Signing Plans/Documents

Citations: 85-3

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
65%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
52%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
46%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
62%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.2 II.1.f II.2 +2

Topics: Competence Duty to the Public Signing Plans/Documents

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Phase Lag

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
48%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
64%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
50%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
36%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.2 II.1.a II.2.a +3

Topics: Plans/Specifications Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Phase Lag

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
67%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
52%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
38%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
57%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: II.2.a II.2.b II.2.c

Topics: Competence Qualifications for Work Signing Plans/Documents

Citations: 85-3

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Cited Precedent 52% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
55%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
51%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
50%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
38%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.2 II.2 II.2.a +2

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
65%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
60%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
27%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
44%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.2 II.1.f II.2 +1

Topics: Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Cites Source 50% Similar
Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
52%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
55%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
38%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
43%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: II.2 II.2.a II.2.b

Topics: Competence Qualifications for Work

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Phase Lag

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
54%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
65%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
18%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
25%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: II.1.a III.1.b

Topics: Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer