Similar Cases

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

Select Source Case
Source Case: Public Welfare—Client Action Following Engineers Services

Case Number: 04-8

Year: 2004

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
38%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
75%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
70%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
57%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Faithful Agents and Trustees Duty to the Public Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
51%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
72%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
50%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
43%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Faithful Agents and Trustees Duty to the Public Conflict of Interest

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Phase Lag

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
45%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
66%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
50%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
67%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Confidential Information Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

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
41%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
75%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
40%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
67%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Confidential Information Duty to the Public

Citations: 89-7

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
43%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
75%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
36%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
67%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Duty to the Public

Citations: 89-7

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
53%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
64%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
40%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
67%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
47%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
69%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
46%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
33%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Duty to the Public

Citations: 89-7

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Both Transfer

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
34%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
83%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
80%
Outcome Match Categorical
0%
Subject Tags Jaccard
71%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

Provisions: I.1 I.4 II.1 +5

Topics: Confidential Information Duty to the Public

Citations: 89-7

Outcome: None vs Ethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Stalemate

Similarity Components
Facts Similarity Cosine
36%
Discussion Similarity Cosine
72%
Provision Overlap Jaccard
42%
Outcome Match Categorical
100%
Subject Tags Jaccard
30%
Principle Tensions Jaccard
0%
What They Share

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

Topics: Duty to the Public

Outcome: Both Unethical

Pattern: Transfer vs Phase Lag