The Adjudication Task Sample Clauses

The Adjudication Task. We created adjudication pools by adapting the methodology of the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) Text REtrieval Conference (TREC) (Xxxxxxxx and Harman, 2000; Xxxxxxxx, 2001). To create adjudication pools, results were aggregated from several open source and commercial tools using lower-than-normal matching thresholds. To be maximally useful, evaluation should be done with reference to a particular use context. For information retrieval, one consideration is the relative importance of precision and recall, or, put another way, the tolerance for false positives and false negatives. In the use case envisioned for this evaluation, a system presents name search results to a user who then has access to additional identifying attributes to make a decision about an overall identity match. Further, we imagine a scenario in which the cost of a false negative is relatively high. Thus, this user is willing to sift through spurious matches in order to ensure that she does not miss a potentially good identity match. We therefore developed a set of guidelines using a “loose” truth criterion, by which two names should be considered a match despite variation beyond superficial spelling differences, as long as there is a plausible relationship between the names. The guidelines enumerate several types of name variations that can establish such a relationship, including both segment-level variation (e.g. alternate spellings) and structural variation (e.g. additions, deletions, reorderings). For example, the names in Figure 1, in which the data contained in the surname field is capitalized, would be considered a possible match.3 3 Because of the structure of Arabic names, the apparently mismatching elements do not necessarily conflict. Xxx Xxxxx is an optional name element meaning “son of Xxxxx”, Xxxx is an honorific title used by someone who has made the pilgrimage to Mecca, and Xx Xxxxx means “the Egyptian”. It is therefore possible that these two names could belong to a single person whose full name is Xxxx Xxxxxxx Bin Xxxxx Xxxxxxx Xx Xxxxx.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to The Adjudication Task

  • Not Adjudicative It is clearly understood that the Committee is not adjudicative in nature. Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties, decisions of the committee are without prejudice or precedent.

  • Reference to Adjudication 17.13.1 When an employee has presented an individual grievance up to and including the final level of the grievance procedure with respect to:

  • Competent Court The Court of Milan shall have jurisdiction over any dispute arising out of this offer to purchase.

  • Defendant’s Guilty Plea The defendant agrees to and hereby does plead guilty to Count One of the indictment charging him with a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, that is, conspiracy. [A copy of the indictment setting forth the charge in Count One is incorporated by reference.] By entering into this plea agreement, the defendant admits that he knowingly committed this and is in fact guilty of this offense.

  • LAW APPLICABLE AND COMPETENT COURT 6.1 The Agreement is governed by [insert the national law of the NA].

  • Charge to Which Defendant Is Pleading Guilty 5. By this Plea Agreement, defendant agrees to enter a voluntary plea of guilty to the following count of the indictment: Count One, which charges defendant with bank fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1344.

  • THE COURT’S FINAL APPROVAL HEARING The Court will hold a hearing to decide whether to approve the settlement. You may attend and you may ask to speak, but you don’t have to.

  • FLORIDA CONVICTED/SUSPENDED/DISCRIMINATORY COMPLAINTS By submission of an offer, the respondent affirms that it is not currently listed in the Florida Department of Management Services Convicted/Suspended/Discriminatory Complaint Vendor List.

  • DISQUALIFICATION FOR PAST PERFORMANCE AND FINDINGS OF NON RESPONSIBILITY Bidder may be disqualified from receiving awards if Bidder, or anyone in Bidder’s employment, has previously failed to perform satisfactorily in connection with public Bidding or contracts or is deemed non- responsible.

  • WORK STOPPAGES, SECONDARY BOYCOTTS, AND JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 16.1 There will be during the term of this Agreement and as to any work covered hereby, no slowdown, no stoppage of work, no strike and no lockout, it being the good faith and intention of the parties hereto that by the execution of this Agreement, industrial peace shall be brought about and maintained, that the parties shall cooperate to the end that work may be done efficiently and without interruption. In the case of any violation of this Agreement the Employer and the Union shall be notified immediately.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.