Similar Cases

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

Select Source Case
Source Case: Selection of Firm—Promise of Future Engineering Work on a Public Project

Case Number: 08-8

Year: 2008

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
40%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
72%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
46%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
67%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 I.4 II.1 +2

Topics: Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
56%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
66%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
36%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
83%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 I.4 II.1 +2

Topics: Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
65%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
78%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
27%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
50%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1 III.2

Topics: Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Phase Lag

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
69%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
62%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
33%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
43%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.4 II.4.a III.1 +1

Topics: Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
48%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
73%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
18%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
80%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
41%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
68%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
27%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
80%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 II.1 III.2

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
51%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
68%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
17%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
67%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: II.4.d III.5

Topics: Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
50%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
53%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
40%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
43%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.4 II.4.a II.4.d +1

Topics: Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
61%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
75%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
25%
Outcome Match Categorical
50%
Subject Tags Jaccard
71%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: II.4.a II.4.d III.5

Topics: Conflict of Interest

Outcome: None vs Mixed

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
53%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
58%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
25%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
43%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.4 II.4.a III.5

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer