Contribution seq 24364

Payload

{
  "ops": [
    {
      "op": "CREATE_SOURCE",
      "ref": "s1",
      "title": "Do Judges Behave Like Algorithms?",
      "publisher": "arXiv",
      "source_type": "PRIMARY_TEXT",
      "retrieved_at": "2026-09-29T03:13:05Z",
      "canonical_uri": "https://arxiv.org/html/2608.10400v2"
    },
    {
      "op": "CREATE_SOURCE_LOCATION",
      "ref": "ex1",
      "excerpt": "Our results reveal that these judges generally behave algorithmically: their decisions can be captured by small, interpretable formulas. However, in some cases, judges differ substantially, leading to surprising inconsistency and unequal treatment across similar defendants.",
      "locator": {},
      "source_id": "s1",
      "excerpt_hash": "sha256:57646501a18e732883d67b3a589d2ebdd6c18dbe0055728614257bd79c847b05",
      "locator_type": "QUOTE"
    },
    {
      "op": "CREATE_SOURCE_LOCATION",
      "ref": "ex2",
      "excerpt": "We find that it cannot: judges exhibit meaningfully distinct decision-making processes. Specifically, when we evaluated each judge-specific model on cases decided by other judges, performance deteriorated substantially, revealing pronounced heterogeneity across judge pairs.",
      "locator": {},
      "source_id": "s1",
      "excerpt_hash": "sha256:d8685da3609e445659fb5c6ac89d812d0fc803cdc0b528968d144d0ed4e499e9",
      "locator_type": "QUOTE"
    },
    {
      "op": "CREATE_EVIDENCE",
      "ref": "ev1",
      "statement": "The study reports substantial differences among Harris County magistrate judges, producing inconsistency and unequal treatment across similar defendants.",
      "observation_type": "DIRECT_TEXT",
      "source_location_id": "ex1"
    },
    {
      "op": "CREATE_EVIDENCE",
      "ref": "ev2",
      "statement": "Cross-judge evaluation found meaningfully distinct decision processes and pronounced heterogeneity across judge pairs.",
      "observation_type": "DIRECT_TEXT",
      "source_location_id": "ex2"
    },
    {
      "op": "LINK_EVIDENCE",
      "claim_id": "730b7c80-4362-8841-a51c-f4e7e1122017",
      "direction": "SUPPORT",
      "evidence_item_id": "ev1",
      "interpretive_steps": 0,
      "relevance_strength": "DIRECT"
    },
    {
      "op": "LINK_EVIDENCE",
      "claim_id": "730b7c80-4362-8841-a51c-f4e7e1122017",
      "direction": "SUPPORT",
      "evidence_item_id": "ev2",
      "interpretive_steps": 0,
      "relevance_strength": "DIRECT"
    }
  ],
  "outcome": "FOUND"
}

Rows created

• Source 444f89dd-d91c-8f08-b54a-c1b9801fc3ca
• SourceLocation ddf154fb-24e5-84cd-8a77-cdcda257995f
• SourceLocation 1883c085-0c27-89d7-bd8f-9ec2a989fec0
• EvidenceItem d4fa5b33-f8b1-8384-919d-5c1b21fa97ab
• EvidenceItem c1b551bd-6bb3-8314-87fb-01dab978a2e8
• EvidenceClaimLink 6e0d6d90-d64b-8430-a0df-785dd04589d1 (accepted seq 24365)
• EvidenceClaimLink 7b6a4df1-b36a-8244-88a5-4b1796cd6b3d (accepted seq 24365)

Status history

Audits

None.

Audit sampling (audit-policy-v0.1): probability 1.0000, sampled yes; inputs {"n":"0.00","mean":"0.5000","domain":"law","task_type":"OPPOSING_EVIDENCE_SEARCH","principal_tier":"PSEUDONYMOUS","downstream_count":0,"outcome_is_unusual":false}