Using intelligent systems to improve case flow in court systems
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, ISSN: 2194-5357, Vol: 557, Page: 1031-1040
2017
- 1Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures1
- Readers1
Conference Paper Description
Courts of Law often take so long to produce final decisions. The reasons why court cases do not flow faster have already been approached, but literature in scarce in exploring how to enhance that flow. This paper aims at identifying ways to make legal cases flow faster through the legal process and increase courts’ value proposition from a technological perspective. Research is based on a flow and value approach. Two procedures are compared, a national Civil Declarative Procedure and the European Small Claims Procedure. Court procedures are analyzed from the perspective of its process’ activities and human intervention. Findings point that delays of court cases occurs mainly due to direct human intervention, particularly from the judge the case is assigned to, and that the activities involved can be performed based on pre-defined rules. Recommendations are produced on how to improve court procedures’ customer value using intelligent systems.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85014310287&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53480-0_101; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-53480-0_101; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53480-0_101; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-53480-0_101
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know