CHAPTER 5 Experts Versus Equations

CHAPTER 5 Experts Versus Equations
Note:5@@@@@@@@@

Yellow highlight | Page: 103

So who’s more accurate, Super Crunchers or traditional experts?
Note:DOMANDA

Yellow highlight | Page: 103

intuitivists and clinicians

Yellow highlight | Page: 103

decision making can’t be quantified
Note:TESI INTUIZIONISTA

Yellow highlight | Page: 103

it is possible to test

Yellow highlight | Page: 103

Super Crunching can be used to adjudicate
Note:CHI GIUDICA

Yellow highlight | Page: 104

Ted Ruger,

Yellow highlight | Page: 104

they could predict how Supreme Court justices would vote.
Note:LA PRETESA DI MARTIN E QUINN USANDO POCHE VARIABILI

Yellow highlight | Page: 104

competition” to compare the accuracy of two different ways to predict the outcome of Supreme Court cases.
Note:LA GARA

Yellow highlight | Page: 104

Super Crunching predictions
Note:IN UN ANGOLO

Yellow highlight | Page: 104

opinions of eighty-three legal experts.
Note:NELL ALTRO

Yellow highlight | Page: 105

The political scientists’ model took into account only six factors:
Note:EQ CON 6 VARIABILI

Yellow highlight | Page: 105

law has not been logic; it has been experience.”
Note:VISIONE DI HOLMES...POSITIVISMO...CENTRATO SULLE PERSONE

Yellow highlight | Page: 105

“law is a science,
Note:VISIONE CONTRAPPOSTA.....COERENTISMO...PIÙ MEL MERITO

Yellow highlight | Page: 105

emphasis on the judge’s prejudices,
Note:MODELLO HOLMESIANO

Yellow highlight | Page: 107

The first decision point predicts that O’Connor would vote to reverse whenever the lower court decision was coded as being “liberal.”
Note:ESEMPIO

Yellow highlight | Page: 107

humans are still necessary to code the case.
Note:UN RUOLO SOGGETTIVO ANCHE X L ALGORITMO

Yellow highlight | Page: 107

The experts lost.
Note:ESITO

Yellow highlight | Page: 108

In study after study, there is a strong tendency for the Super Crunchers to come out on top.
Note:LA TENDENZA IN VARIE AREE

Yellow highlight | Page: 108

Little
CAPITOLO DA TERMINARE