Can Machines Replace the Human Brain? A Review of Litigation Outcome Prediction Methods for Construction Disputes Cover Image

Can Machines Replace the Human Brain? A Review of Litigation Outcome Prediction Methods for Construction Disputes
Can Machines Replace the Human Brain? A Review of Litigation Outcome Prediction Methods for Construction Disputes

Author(s): Ahmad ALOZN, Abdulla GALADARI
Subject(s): Law, Constitution, Jurisprudence, International Law, Philosophy of Law, Comparative Law
Published by: EDITURA ASE
Keywords: Machines; Human Brain; Disputes;

Summary/Abstract: Construction projects are naturally complicated and involve large number of unpredictable as well as external interrelated factors. Complex construction projects value is in excess of billions of dollars. As a result, disputes between the contracting parties are critical and difficult to resolve. Traditionally, litigation was the only avenue to resolve such disputes. However, with its complicated nature and technicalities involved, construction projects’ experts deployed alternative dispute resolution methods such as arbitration and mediation. Each vary in the involved resources and the legal consequences. Litigation, however, is found to be one of the most expensive and time consuming methods. Moreover, the results of litigation are unguaranteed. Therefore, researchers attempted to predict the outcome of litigation in the field of construction dispute to give the contracting parties a good order of estimate on the expected outcome. This would be a good tool to decide whether a party shall file a litigation case or not.

  • Issue Year: 2016
  • Issue No: 1
  • Page Range: 73-80
  • Page Count: 8
  • Language: English
Toggle Accessibility Mode