Insights

Research & Analysis

Original research on litigation intelligence, behavioral game theory, and AI-powered evidence management.

New here? Start with Sentient Analysis for the thesis, then Red Team Your Case for the scoring framework, then Adversarial Consensus for how we validate.

Market Research

The Litigation Dead Zone

86% of civil trial winners receive awards under $250,000. 5.6 to 9 million cases per year fall in a range that institutional funders refuse to touch. AI changes the math.

Read →

Thesis

Complexity as Signal: Why AI-Augmented Litigation Works Differently

In a classically staffed case, complexity is a weakness. In an AI-augmented case, complexity is the primary source of value. The connections between cases are the product.

Read →

Safety Engineering

Safety Shield: Physical Safety as a Constraint Layer

Safety should be a constraint, not a checklist. S-ARPN scoring integrates physical safety into litigation intelligence as a continuous constraint on the decision optimizer.

Read →

Featured Research

From Sentiment to Sentient: A New Framework for Litigation Intelligence

Every tool reads sentiment. Acquit.ai models the sentient. How modeling opposing parties as cognitive agents with belief architectures and behavioral modifiers achieves 91% prediction accuracy.

Read →

Practitioner Guide

Red Team Your Case: The ARPN Framework

Adapted FMEA for litigation intelligence. A five-factor risk scoring system that models behavioral amplification and cascade effects, with a worked example from a $32M Texas verdict.

Read →

Methodology

The Disagreement Is the Feature: Adversarial Consensus Scoring

How the Acquit Score™ is calculated. Multi-model adversarial scoring gives you multiple perspectives, and highlights the blind spots your opponent will exploit.

Read →

Research Brief

The Real Cost of eDiscovery

RAND's $1.8M median benchmark, current vendor pricing, the access gap, and a clearly labeled modeled comparison for what compression can look like.

Read →

Research Paper

Behavioral Modifiers in Litigation Game Theory

When game theory meets human reality: a framework for predicting what litigants will actually do. Visual explainer with interactive payoff models.

Read →