FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W205804977> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W205804977 startingPage "353" @default.
• W205804977 abstract "RECENT reductions cost and exponential increases capacity and processing speeds have rendered computer technology not only accessible to courts and increasingly essential to litigation management, but also ever more influential over the fact-finding process. Text, numbers, equations, photographs, videos, sounds--all can be reduced to binary expressions, stored electronically and fully manipulated. The potential applications and uses of computer technology the courtroom limited only by counsel's imagination. The evidentiary issues underlying the admissibility of still photographs pale comparison to the conundrums spawned by dynamic, computer-generated images, which as persuasive as they capable of subtle distortion. Computer-generated evidence highlights some fundamental weaknesses the implicit assumptions underlying the evidentiary rules. This article attempts, ataxically, to identify and comment on a few. THE HUMAN EQUATION Although human beings capable of speaking at rates of 150 to 200 words per minute, it is believed they capable of receiving, processing and comprehending at a much higher rate. Studies have suggested that a mode presenting information that engages both the senses of sight and sound yields retention six times greater than mere verbal presentation alone.(1) Yet, the method by which human neural synapses process two-dimensional retinal phenomena into three-dimensional images, or waves of certain frequency and amplitude into the sense of sound is, simply put, not understood. Seeing may not necessarily justify believing. Perfectly examples of mirage--of misperceiving matters as they are--abound. The stick immersed water appears to be bent, although in reality it is straight. Trees on a distant mountainside appear to be greyish-blue, although on approach they are dark green. Two lines the Muller illusion--one with arrows pointing inward and the other with arrows pointing outward--appear to be of different length, although they equally long. When illuminated by primarily yellow light, a blue dress appears to be black. As the train or ambulance approaches, the whistle or siren seems to be of higher pitch than when it recedes, although the frequency and amplitude is constant. Water the same vessel will seem warm to a hand that has been immersed water and cold to another hand that has been immersed warmer water, although the actual temperature is uniform throughout the vessel. Indeed, perceiving phenomena that do not exist is well known: press your eyeball and you will see two candles or light bulbs when only one is there. Without the aid of instrumentation or machinery, the five senses quite capable of deception by sublime illusions from relatively static and seemingly familiar objects and circumstances. These initial sensory deficits compounded immeasurably by the mysterious ways which the brain processes data received by the senses. Such compounding is magnified inestimably through emotion, bias, prejudice and habit.(2) What, then, the circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness(3) that ought to govern the admissibility of computer-generated evidence and how ought these circumstances be assessed and applied to this versatile tool? THE COMPUTER EQUATION Computer-generated evidence, CGE for short, is indeed extraordinarily versatile. For example, it has been proffered to re-create airplane accidents,(4) to re-enact automobile accidents,(5) to assess the fair market value of land based on projected present values of royalty interests gas and oil wells,(6) to demonstrate the perfectibility of products,(7) and to construct hypothetical markets an antitrust claim for purposes of illustrating anticompetitive behavior.(8) The suitability of applying to CGE the evidentiary rules antedating the arrival of computerized technology by some distance has been and continues to be the subject of substantial debate contemporary literature. …" @default.
• W205804977 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W205804977 creator A5077727479 @default.
• W205804977 date "1996-07-01" @default.
• W205804977 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W205804977 title "Computer-Generated Evidence: Testing the Envelope" @default.
• W205804977 hasPublicationYear "1996" @default.
• W205804977 type Work @default.
• W205804977 sameAs 205804977 @default.
• W205804977 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W205804977 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W205804977 hasAuthorship W205804977A5077727479 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C111919701 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C1276947 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C1517167 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C188147891 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C2777601897 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C2780876879 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W205804977 hasConcept C98045186 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C111472728 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C111919701 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C121332964 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C126838900 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C1276947 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C138885662 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C1517167 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C154945302 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C15744967 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C17744445 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C188147891 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C199539241 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C2777601897 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C2780876879 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C41008148 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C71924100 @default.
• W205804977 hasConceptScore W205804977C98045186 @default.
• W205804977 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W205804977 hasLocation W2058049771 @default.
• W205804977 hasOpenAccess W205804977 @default.
• W205804977 hasPrimaryLocation W2058049771 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W1878849506 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W1967738526 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W1974838915 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W1991302340 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2018937315 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2097051968 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2128185253 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2191336486 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2247047164 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2313048880 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2313833258 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2314538346 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2315846747 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2326788812 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2332477325 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2334607218 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2462772495 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W2503102685 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W315639812 @default.
• W205804977 hasRelatedWork W81854681 @default.
• W205804977 hasVolume "63" @default.
• W205804977 isParatext "false" @default.
• W205804977 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W205804977 magId "205804977" @default.
• W205804977 workType "article" @default.