{
  "id": "AIBD-0085",
  "title": "STF's VitorIA identifies at least 247 similar appeals in the controversy behind Tema 1.261; Plenary finds no general repercussion on 22 August 2023",
  "summary": "VitorIA identified at least 247 similar appeals in the controversy behind Tema 1.261; STF Plenary found no general repercussion on 22 August 2023 (final 23 September 2023)",
  "date_observed": "2023-08-22",
  "date_basis": "unassessed",
  "date_precision": "unassessed",
  "benefit_status": null,
  "source_collection": null,
  "source_entry": null,
  "account": "Brazil's Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) uses VitorIA, operational since 2023, to compare the texts of incoming appeals. It groups cases raising similar legal questions for the staff who screen candidates for repercussão geral themes. The court says the tool does not judge cases. On 28 September 2026 the STF described the controversy behind Tema 1.261 (leading case ARE 1441934, on municipal teachers' personal pay advantages). VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions by grouping on content similarity. The STF added that finding so many similar cases did not determine the result. The theme record shows the Plenary decided unanimously on 22 August 2023 that there is no general repercussion because the question is infraconstitutional. It became final on 23 September 2023. No cited source says what then happened to the 247 appeals. The STF credits VitorIA with four themes in 2023, 19 in 2024 and 11 in 2025. It says these figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating accuracy or time saved.",
  "category": "benefit created",
  "unexpected": false,
  "purpose": "Identify clusters of textually similar appeals so the court can treat them jointly or open new general-repercussion themes",
  "system": "VitorIA (STF), textual-similarity clustering tool that groups appeals raising similar legal questions; in development in 2022 and operational in 2023 per the STF",
  "model_version": null,
  "developer": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF); the STF's 28 Sep 2026 item names no external developer and does not link VitorIA to the court's earlier Victor project",
  "deployer": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF)",
  "location": "Brasília, Brazil",
  "domain": "Courts: appellate case management",
  "segment": "Supreme court general-repercussion screening",
  "benefit_type": "Improved Knowledge Discovery",
  "taxonomy_note": null,
  "registry_ids": {},
  "ratings": [
    {
      "group": "personal",
      "depth": null,
      "reason": "No individual beneficiary or per-party outcome is documented. The STF says its figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating time saved."
    },
    {
      "group": "organizational",
      "depth": 2,
      "reason": "Material to the court's screening work: in one controversy VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions. The STF describes this as the technology taking part in organizing and identifying patterns in its case flow. The STF does not quantify time saved."
    },
    {
      "group": "societal",
      "depth": 1,
      "reason": "Small at system scale. One theme among the 34 the STF credits to VitorIA for 2023–2025."
    }
  ],
  "ai_role": {
    "status": "assessed",
    "statement": "The STF says its function precedes judgment: “identificar grupos de casos parecidos, que depois passam pela análise das equipes responsáveis e, quando necessário, dos ministros.” The identification of at least 247 similar appeals is attributed to VitorIA by the court itself. The court adds that finding them “não determinou o resultado”. The theme decision was made by the Plenary. Developer and deployer are the same public body (STF). The STF news items are the court documenting its own tool. No cited source names an external developer or links VitorIA to the court's earlier Victor project (STF with UnB). The STF said in August 2021 that Victor's classifier was not yet in production."
  },
  "evidence": [
    {
      "kind": "press release",
      "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2026). Inteligência artificial ajuda STF a identificar processos que discutem questões semelhantes. STF news, 28 Sep 2026.",
      "title": "Inteligência artificial ajuda STF a identificar processos que discutem questões semelhantes",
      "url": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
      "date": "2026-09-28",
      "written_by": "makers",
      "quote": "a VitorIA identificou pelo menos 247 recursos com questões jurídicas semelhantes"
    },
    {
      "kind": "court document",
      "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2023). Repercussão Geral, Tema 1261, leading case ARE 1441934 (Relator: Ministro Presidente); decision of 22 Aug 2023, trânsito em julgado 23 Sep 2023.",
      "title": "Tema 1261 – Revisão da base de cálculo das vantagens pessoais remuneratórias de servidor público de magistério municipal",
      "url": "https://portal.stf.jus.br/jurisprudenciaRepercussao/tema.asp?num=1261",
      "date": null,
      "written_by": "makers",
      "quote": "Não há repercussão geral (questão infraconstitucional)"
    },
    {
      "kind": "press release",
      "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2021). Projeto Victor avança em pesquisa e desenvolvimento para identificação dos temas de repercussão geral. STF news, 19 Aug 2021. Background on the court's earlier Victor project (STF with Universidade de Brasília); the item does not mention VitorIA.",
      "title": "Projeto Victor avança em pesquisa e desenvolvimento para identificação dos temas de repercussão geral",
      "url": "https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=471331",
      "date": "2021-08-19",
      "written_by": "makers",
      "quote": "todos os recursos recebidos diariamente no STF em meio eletrônico têm suas peças devidamente ocerizadas no mesmo dia"
    }
  ],
  "replication": {
    "produced_by": [
      "Electronic appeals in machine-readable text for VitorIA to compare. The STF's 2021 Victor item documents same-day OCR of all electronic appeals since December 2020. No cited source ties that layer to VitorIA, so the dependency is inferred",
      "Textual-similarity clustering by VitorIA proposing groups of similar appeals",
      "Human screening teams and ministers deciding whether to open a theme and how to rule"
    ],
    "must_hold": [
      "Appeals filed electronically with machine-readable text",
      "A procedural device (repercussão geral themes) that lets one decision govern many appeals",
      "Staff capacity to review proposed clusters"
    ],
    "echoes": [
      {
        "date": "2024-01-01",
        "setting": "19 general-repercussion themes created with support from VitorIA data in 2024 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
        "model_version": null,
        "outcome": "recurred",
        "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
      },
      {
        "date": "2025-01-01",
        "setting": "11 themes created with VitorIA support in 2025 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
        "model_version": null,
        "outcome": "recurred",
        "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
      }
    ]
  },
  "paired_incident": {
    "database": "AI Incident Database",
    "identifier": "1497",
    "title": "Hidden Prompt Injection in Brazilian Labor-Court Petition Reportedly Tried to Manipulate Galileu",
    "url": "https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/1497",
    "severity": null,
    "group": "organizational",
    "basis": "Brazilian court AI that reads case petitions (Galileu), the same kind of tool as STF's VitorIA, was targeted by hidden prompt injection, harming judicial integrity and defendants."
  },
  "headline": "STF's VitorIA finds at least 247 similar appeals for Tema 1.261",
  "metric": "identified at least 247 similar appeals in the controversy behind Tema 1.261",
  "comparator": null,
  "later": {
    "status": "persisted",
    "date": "2026-09-28",
    "note": "The STF's September 2026 statement reports the tool still in use after Tema 1.261, credited with 19 themes in 2024 and 11 in 2025 after four in 2023 (years only), while saying the figures do not allow computing accuracy or time saved.",
    "quote": "A VitorIA auxiliou na identificação de quatro temas em 2023; em 2024, 19 foram criados com apoio de dados extraídos da ferramenta; já em 2025, foram 11.",
    "url": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
  },
  "value": null,
  "developer_country": "Brazil",
  "deployer_country": "Brazil",
  "unrated_because": null,
  "brief_notes": null,
  "brief": null,
  "revisions": [
    {
      "date": "2026-10-20",
      "change": "Record drafted from the cited sources.",
      "source": null,
      "editor": "AIBD"
    },
    {
      "date": "2026-10-20",
      "change": "Paired with AI Incident Database incident 1497 (medium confidence); severity not given by the source.",
      "source": "https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/1497",
      "editor": "AIBD"
    },
    {
      "date": "2026-10-20",
      "change": "Removed the unsourced claims that the Tema 1.261 decision settled or disposed of the grouped appeals and that parties obtained a faster disposition (personal depth now null); wrote “at least 247” in title, headline and metric as the STF does; dropped the Victor lineage, UnB credit and OCR dependency because no cited source links VitorIA to the Victor project, re-describing the 2021 Victor item as background; added that developer and deployer are the same public body (STF); and set the benefit type to Trustible's “Improved Knowledge Discovery” with a note that the STF says its figures do not allow calculating time saved or accuracy.",
      "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
      "editor": "AIBD"
    },
    {
      "date": "2026-10-21",
      "change": "Added what happened since from the cited sources.",
      "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
      "editor": "AIBD"
    },
    {
      "date": "2026-10-21",
      "change": "Country of the developer and the deployer added from the organization's own site or a registry.",
      "source": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Federal_Court; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Federal_Court",
      "editor": "AIBD"
    },
    {
      "date": "2026-10-21",
      "change": "Prose pass: a rating reason, account, the replication conditions, the system's part rewritten in shorter sentences with abbreviations expanded; facts, figures and quotations unchanged.",
      "source": null,
      "editor": "AIBD"
    }
  ],
  "confidence": "claimed",
  "shade": "low",
  "claim_status": "The makers' claim",
  "claim_basis": "Sources: the makers' court document and two press releases from the makers. The cited evidence includes no independent source and no finding by a regulator or court.",
  "profile": {
    "case_id": "AIBD-0085",
    "catalog_version": "1.0.0",
    "source_fingerprint": "d4e33ebdaef438cc3f33a49e57b063b80abeb14577d84b683384c5ae0cc6720e",
    "collection_refs": [
      {
        "collection_id": "aibd",
        "version": "snapshot-8bf7cfec9cb185aa"
      },
      {
        "collection_id": "aibd",
        "version": "2026-10-25"
      },
      {
        "collection_id": "querist",
        "version": "2026-10-25"
      }
    ],
    "source_ids": [
      "AIBD-0085-source-0001",
      "AIBD-0085-source-0002",
      "AIBD-0085-source-0003"
    ],
    "families": {
      "strategic assessments": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "record_ids": []
      },
      "evaluations": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "record_ids": []
      },
      "monetary observations": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "record_ids": []
      },
      "institutional decisions": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "record_ids": []
      }
    },
    "fields": {
      "actors[]": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "developer": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF); the STF's 28 Sep 2026 item names no external developer and does not link VitorIA to the court's earlier Victor project",
            "deployer": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF)"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "developer",
            "deployer"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "actors[].ownership_control": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "ai_contribution": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "ai_role": {
              "status": "assessed",
              "statement": "The STF says its function precedes judgment: “identificar grupos de casos parecidos, que depois passam pela análise das equipes responsáveis e, quando necessário, dos ministros.” The identification of at least 247 similar appeals is attributed to VitorIA by the court itself. The court adds that finding them “não determinou o resultado”. The theme decision was made by the Plenary. Developer and deployer are the same public body (STF). The STF news items are the court documenting its own tool. No cited source names an external developer or links VitorIA to the court's earlier Victor project (STF with UnB). The STF said in August 2021 that Victor's classifier was not yet in production."
            }
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "ai_role"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "ai_relationship": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "category": "benefit created",
            "ai_role": {
              "status": "assessed",
              "statement": "The STF says its function precedes judgment: “identificar grupos de casos parecidos, que depois passam pela análise das equipes responsáveis e, quando necessário, dos ministros.” The identification of at least 247 similar appeals is attributed to VitorIA by the court itself. The court adds that finding them “não determinou o resultado”. The theme decision was made by the Plenary. Developer and deployer are the same public body (STF). The STF news items are the court documenting its own tool. No cited source names an external developer or links VitorIA to the court's earlier Victor project (STF with UnB). The STF said in August 2021 that Victor's classifier was not yet in production."
            }
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "ai_role",
            "category"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].alternatives": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].assessor_date": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].depth": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "ratings": [
              {
                "group": "personal",
                "reason": "No individual beneficiary or per-party outcome is documented. The STF says its figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "organizational",
                "depth": 2,
                "reason": "Material to the court's screening work: in one controversy VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions. The STF describes this as the technology taking part in organizing and identifying patterns in its case flow. The STF does not quantify time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "societal",
                "depth": 1,
                "reason": "Small at system scale. One theme among the 34 the STF credits to VitorIA for 2023–2025."
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "ratings"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].display_confidence": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "structured",
          "data": {
            "confidence": "low",
            "evidence_word": "claimed",
            "claim_status": "The makers' claim",
            "basis": "Sources: the makers' court document and two press releases from the makers. The cited evidence includes no independent source and no finding by a regulator or court.",
            "interpretation": "Existing display rule preserved; the richer outcome-specific confidence question still needs review."
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "curatorial",
          "basis": "Derived from the existing case display properties; not a new evidentiary judgment.",
          "record_fields": [],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].rationale": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "ratings": [
              {
                "group": "personal",
                "reason": "No individual beneficiary or per-party outcome is documented. The STF says its figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "organizational",
                "depth": 2,
                "reason": "Material to the court's screening work: in one controversy VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions. The STF describes this as the technology taking part in organizing and identifying patterns in its case flow. The STF does not quantify time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "societal",
                "depth": 1,
                "reason": "Small at system scale. One theme among the 34 the STF credits to VitorIA for 2023–2025."
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "ratings"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].rubric_version": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].status_basis": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "assessments[].target": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "ratings": [
              {
                "group": "personal",
                "reason": "No individual beneficiary or per-party outcome is documented. The STF says its figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "organizational",
                "depth": 2,
                "reason": "Material to the court's screening work: in one controversy VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions. The STF describes this as the technology taking part in organizing and identifying patterns in its case flow. The STF does not quantify time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "societal",
                "depth": 1,
                "reason": "Small at system scale. One theme among the 34 the STF credits to VitorIA for 2023–2025."
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "ratings"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "availability": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "brief": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "case_kind": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "case_links[]": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "structured",
          "data": {
            "answer": "Brazilian court AI that reads case petitions (Galileu), the same kind of tool as STF's VitorIA, was targeted by hidden prompt injection, harming judicial integrity and defendants.",
            "links": [
              {
                "database": "AI Incident Database",
                "identifier": "1497",
                "title": "Hidden Prompt Injection in Brazilian Labor-Court Petition Reportedly Tried to Manipulate Galileu",
                "url": "https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/1497",
                "group": "organizational",
                "basis": "Brazilian court AI that reads case petitions (Galileu), the same kind of tool as STF's VitorIA, was targeted by hidden prompt injection, harming judicial integrity and defendants.",
                "relation": "comparable_harm"
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Existing paired_incident classification; no new source review.",
          "record_fields": [
            "paired_incident"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "claims[].evidence_links": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "claims[].evidence_strength": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "claims[].missingness": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "claims[].proposition": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "cross_border_flows[]": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "decisions[].action_outcome": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "institutional decisions"
      },
      "decisions[].grounds": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "institutional decisions"
      },
      "decisions[].institution_task": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "institutional decisions"
      },
      "decisions[].success_criterion": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "institutional decisions"
      },
      "deployment_stage": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "economics[].amount": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].costs[]": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].counterfactual": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].currency_price_basis": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].gross_net": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].measure_type": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].period_unit": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].realization": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].recipient_payer": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].return_payback": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "economics[].valuation_method": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "monetary observations"
      },
      "evaluations[].ai_uplift": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].comparator": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].design": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].effect": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].exposure": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].id": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].measurement_method": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].metric": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Mapped from the existing case description without a new external source review.",
          "record_fields": [
            "metric"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations",
        "display": {
          "answer": "identified at least 247 similar appeals in the controversy behind Tema 1.261",
          "editor_note": ""
        }
      },
      "evaluations[].reproduction_materials": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].setting_sample": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "evaluations[].uncertainty_limitations": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "evaluations"
      },
      "external_references[]": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "paired_incident": {
              "database": "AI Incident Database",
              "identifier": "1497",
              "title": "Hidden Prompt Injection in Brazilian Labor-Court Petition Reportedly Tried to Manipulate Galileu",
              "url": "https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/1497",
              "group": "organizational",
              "basis": "Brazilian court AI that reads case petitions (Galileu), the same kind of tool as STF's VitorIA, was targeted by hidden prompt injection, harming judicial integrity and defendants."
            }
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "paired_incident"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "follow_up[]": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "later": {
              "status": "persisted",
              "date": "2026-09-28",
              "note": "The STF's September 2026 statement reports the tool still in use after Tema 1.261, credited with 19 themes in 2024 and 11 in 2025 after four in 2023 (years only), while saying the figures do not allow computing accuracy or time saved.",
              "quote": "A VitorIA auxiliou na identificação de quatro temas em 2023; em 2024, 19 foram criados com apoio de dados extraídos da ferramenta; já em 2025, foram 11.",
              "url": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
            }
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "later"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "human_oversight": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "id": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "id": "AIBD-0085"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "id"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "infrastructure_dependencies[]": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].beneficiaries": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].beneficiary_count": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].benefit_type": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "benefit_type": "Improved Knowledge Discovery"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "benefit_type"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].claim": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "account": "Brazil's Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) uses VitorIA, operational since 2023, to compare the texts of incoming appeals. It groups cases raising similar legal questions for the staff who screen candidates for repercussão geral themes. The court says the tool does not judge cases. On 28 September 2026 the STF described the controversy behind Tema 1.261 (leading case ARE 1441934, on municipal teachers' personal pay advantages). VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions by grouping on content similarity. The STF added that finding so many similar cases did not determine the result. The theme record shows the Plenary decided unanimously on 22 August 2023 that there is no general repercussion because the question is infraconstitutional. It became final on 23 September 2023. No cited source says what then happened to the 247 appeals. The STF credits VitorIA with four themes in 2023, 19 in 2024 and 11 in 2025. It says these figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating accuracy or time saved.",
            "benefit_type": "Improved Knowledge Discovery"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "account",
            "benefit_type"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].distribution": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].duration": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].id": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].stakeholder_group": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "ratings": [
              {
                "group": "personal",
                "reason": "No individual beneficiary or per-party outcome is documented. The STF says its figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "organizational",
                "depth": 2,
                "reason": "Material to the court's screening work: in one controversy VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions. The STF describes this as the technology taking part in organizing and identifying patterns in its case flow. The STF does not quantify time saved."
              },
              {
                "group": "societal",
                "depth": 1,
                "reason": "Small at system scale. One theme among the 34 the STF credits to VitorIA for 2023–2025."
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "ratings"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].status": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].tradeoffs": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "outcomes[].unexpected": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "unexpected": false,
            "purpose": "Identify clusters of textually similar appeals so the court can treat them jointly or open new general-repercussion themes"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "unexpected",
            "purpose"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "places[]": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "location": "Brasília, Brazil",
            "developer_country": "Brazil",
            "deployer_country": "Brazil"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "location",
            "developer_country",
            "deployer_country"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "purpose": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "purpose": "Identify clusters of textually similar appeals so the court can treat them jointly or open new general-repercussion themes"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "purpose"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "record_dates": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "date_observed": "2023-08-22",
            "revisions": [
              {
                "date": "2026-10-20",
                "change": "Record drafted from the cited sources.",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-20",
                "change": "Paired with AI Incident Database incident 1497 (medium confidence); severity not given by the source.",
                "source": "https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/1497",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-20",
                "change": "Removed the unsourced claims that the Tema 1.261 decision settled or disposed of the grouped appeals and that parties obtained a faster disposition (personal depth now null); wrote “at least 247” in title, headline and metric as the STF does; dropped the Victor lineage, UnB credit and OCR dependency because no cited source links VitorIA to the Victor project, re-describing the 2021 Victor item as background; added that developer and deployer are the same public body (STF); and set the benefit type to Trustible's “Improved Knowledge Discovery” with a note that the STF says its figures do not allow calculating time saved or accuracy.",
                "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-21",
                "change": "Added what happened since from the cited sources.",
                "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-21",
                "change": "Country of the developer and the deployer added from the organization's own site or a registry.",
                "source": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Federal_Court; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Federal_Court",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-21",
                "change": "Prose pass: a rating reason, account, the replication conditions, the system's part rewritten in shorter sentences with abbreviations expanded; facts, figures and quotations unchanged.",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "date_observed",
            "revisions"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "replication.attempts[]": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "replication": {
              "produced_by": [
                "Electronic appeals in machine-readable text for VitorIA to compare. The STF's 2021 Victor item documents same-day OCR of all electronic appeals since December 2020. No cited source ties that layer to VitorIA, so the dependency is inferred",
                "Textual-similarity clustering by VitorIA proposing groups of similar appeals",
                "Human screening teams and ministers deciding whether to open a theme and how to rule"
              ],
              "must_hold": [
                "Appeals filed electronically with machine-readable text",
                "A procedural device (repercussão geral themes) that lets one decision govern many appeals",
                "Staff capacity to review proposed clusters"
              ],
              "echoes": [
                {
                  "date": "2024-01-01",
                  "setting": "19 general-repercussion themes created with support from VitorIA data in 2024 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
                  "outcome": "recurred",
                  "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
                },
                {
                  "date": "2025-01-01",
                  "setting": "11 themes created with VitorIA support in 2025 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
                  "outcome": "recurred",
                  "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
                }
              ]
            }
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "replication"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "replication.conditions": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "replication": {
              "produced_by": [
                "Electronic appeals in machine-readable text for VitorIA to compare. The STF's 2021 Victor item documents same-day OCR of all electronic appeals since December 2020. No cited source ties that layer to VitorIA, so the dependency is inferred",
                "Textual-similarity clustering by VitorIA proposing groups of similar appeals",
                "Human screening teams and ministers deciding whether to open a theme and how to rule"
              ],
              "must_hold": [
                "Appeals filed electronically with machine-readable text",
                "A procedural device (repercussão geral themes) that lets one decision govern many appeals",
                "Staff capacity to review proposed clusters"
              ],
              "echoes": [
                {
                  "date": "2024-01-01",
                  "setting": "19 general-repercussion themes created with support from VitorIA data in 2024 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
                  "outcome": "recurred",
                  "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
                },
                {
                  "date": "2025-01-01",
                  "setting": "11 themes created with VitorIA support in 2025 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
                  "outcome": "recurred",
                  "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
                }
              ]
            }
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "replication"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "revision_history[]": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "revisions": [
              {
                "date": "2026-10-20",
                "change": "Record drafted from the cited sources.",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-20",
                "change": "Paired with AI Incident Database incident 1497 (medium confidence); severity not given by the source.",
                "source": "https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/1497",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-20",
                "change": "Removed the unsourced claims that the Tema 1.261 decision settled or disposed of the grouped appeals and that parties obtained a faster disposition (personal depth now null); wrote “at least 247” in title, headline and metric as the STF does; dropped the Victor lineage, UnB credit and OCR dependency because no cited source links VitorIA to the Victor project, re-describing the 2021 Victor item as background; added that developer and deployer are the same public body (STF); and set the benefit type to Trustible's “Improved Knowledge Discovery” with a note that the STF says its figures do not allow calculating time saved or accuracy.",
                "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-21",
                "change": "Added what happened since from the cited sources.",
                "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-21",
                "change": "Country of the developer and the deployer added from the organization's own site or a registry.",
                "source": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Federal_Court; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Federal_Court",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              },
              {
                "date": "2026-10-21",
                "change": "Prose pass: a rating reason, account, the replication conditions, the system's part rewritten in shorter sentences with abbreviations expanded; facts, figures and quotations unchanged.",
                "editor": "AIBD"
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "revisions"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "sector": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "domain": "Courts: appellate case management",
            "segment": "Supreme court general-repercussion screening"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "domain",
            "segment"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "sources[].access_version": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "sources[].citation_locator": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "evidence": [
              {
                "kind": "press release",
                "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2026). Inteligência artificial ajuda STF a identificar processos que discutem questões semelhantes. STF news, 28 Sep 2026.",
                "title": "Inteligência artificial ajuda STF a identificar processos que discutem questões semelhantes",
                "url": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
                "date": "2026-09-28",
                "written_by": "makers",
                "quote": "a VitorIA identificou pelo menos 247 recursos com questões jurídicas semelhantes"
              },
              {
                "kind": "court document",
                "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2023). Repercussão Geral, Tema 1261, leading case ARE 1441934 (Relator: Ministro Presidente); decision of 22 Aug 2023, trânsito em julgado 23 Sep 2023.",
                "title": "Tema 1261 – Revisão da base de cálculo das vantagens pessoais remuneratórias de servidor público de magistério municipal",
                "url": "https://portal.stf.jus.br/jurisprudenciaRepercussao/tema.asp?num=1261",
                "written_by": "makers",
                "quote": "Não há repercussão geral (questão infraconstitucional)"
              },
              {
                "kind": "press release",
                "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2021). Projeto Victor avança em pesquisa e desenvolvimento para identificação dos temas de repercussão geral. STF news, 19 Aug 2021. Background on the court's earlier Victor project (STF with Universidade de Brasília); the item does not mention VitorIA.",
                "title": "Projeto Victor avança em pesquisa e desenvolvimento para identificação dos temas de repercussão geral",
                "url": "https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=471331",
                "date": "2021-08-19",
                "written_by": "makers",
                "quote": "todos os recursos recebidos diariamente no STF em meio eletrônico têm suas peças devidamente ocerizadas no mesmo dia"
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "evidence"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "sources[].id": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "identifiers",
          "identifiers": [
            "AIBD-0085-source-0001",
            "AIBD-0085-source-0002",
            "AIBD-0085-source-0003"
          ],
          "role": "Existing evidence items, in their original order"
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "curatorial",
          "basis": "Stable within the fingerprinted record version; no source content or source review has been added.",
          "record_fields": [],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "complete"
      },
      "sources[].language": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "sources[].relationship": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "evidence": [
              {
                "kind": "press release",
                "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2026). Inteligência artificial ajuda STF a identificar processos que discutem questões semelhantes. STF news, 28 Sep 2026.",
                "title": "Inteligência artificial ajuda STF a identificar processos que discutem questões semelhantes",
                "url": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/",
                "date": "2026-09-28",
                "written_by": "makers",
                "quote": "a VitorIA identificou pelo menos 247 recursos com questões jurídicas semelhantes"
              },
              {
                "kind": "court document",
                "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2023). Repercussão Geral, Tema 1261, leading case ARE 1441934 (Relator: Ministro Presidente); decision of 22 Aug 2023, trânsito em julgado 23 Sep 2023.",
                "title": "Tema 1261 – Revisão da base de cálculo das vantagens pessoais remuneratórias de servidor público de magistério municipal",
                "url": "https://portal.stf.jus.br/jurisprudenciaRepercussao/tema.asp?num=1261",
                "written_by": "makers",
                "quote": "Não há repercussão geral (questão infraconstitucional)"
              },
              {
                "kind": "press release",
                "citation": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (2021). Projeto Victor avança em pesquisa e desenvolvimento para identificação dos temas de repercussão geral. STF news, 19 Aug 2021. Background on the court's earlier Victor project (STF with Universidade de Brasília); the item does not mention VitorIA.",
                "title": "Projeto Victor avança em pesquisa e desenvolvimento para identificação dos temas de repercussão geral",
                "url": "https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=471331",
                "date": "2021-08-19",
                "written_by": "makers",
                "quote": "todos os recursos recebidos diariamente no STF em meio eletrônico têm suas peças devidamente ocerizadas no mesmo dia"
              }
            ]
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "evidence"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "sources[].upstream_sources": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "strategic_assessments[]": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial",
        "family": "strategic assessments"
      },
      "summary": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "summary": "VitorIA identified at least 247 similar appeals in the controversy behind Tema 1.261; STF Plenary found no general repercussion on 22 August 2023 (final 23 September 2023)",
            "account": "Brazil's Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) uses VitorIA, operational since 2023, to compare the texts of incoming appeals. It groups cases raising similar legal questions for the staff who screen candidates for repercussão geral themes. The court says the tool does not judge cases. On 28 September 2026 the STF described the controversy behind Tema 1.261 (leading case ARE 1441934, on municipal teachers' personal pay advantages). VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions by grouping on content similarity. The STF added that finding so many similar cases did not determine the result. The theme record shows the Plenary decided unanimously on 22 August 2023 that there is no general repercussion because the question is infraconstitutional. It became final on 23 September 2023. No cited source says what then happened to the 247 appeals. The STF credits VitorIA with four themes in 2023, 19 in 2024 and 11 in 2025. It says these figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating accuracy or time saved."
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "summary",
            "account"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].autonomy_permissions": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].component_role": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].deployment_configuration": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].inputs_outputs": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].model_name": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].model_version": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].product_name": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "system": "VitorIA (STF), textual-similarity clustering tool that groups appeals raising similar legal questions; in development in 2022 and operational in 2023 per the STF"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "system"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "systems[].provider": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "structured",
          "data": {
            "application_developer": "Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF); the STF's 28 Sep 2026 item names no external developer and does not link VitorIA to the court's earlier Victor project"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Mapped from the existing case description without a new external source review.",
          "record_fields": [
            "developer"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "taxonomy_crosswalks[]": {
        "state": "not_assessed",
        "review_state": "not_assessed",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "title": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "title": "STF's VitorIA identifies at least 247 similar appeals in the controversy behind Tema 1.261; Plenary finds no general repercussion on 22 August 2023",
            "headline": "STF's VitorIA finds at least 247 similar appeals for Tema 1.261"
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "title",
            "headline"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      },
      "version": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "identifiers",
          "identifiers": [
            "d4e33ebdaef438cc3f33a49e57b063b80abeb14577d84b683384c5ae0cc6720e"
          ],
          "role": "SHA-256 of normalized original case data"
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "curatorial",
          "basis": "Deterministic content version assigned by the local migration.",
          "record_fields": [],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "complete"
      },
      "workflow": {
        "state": "value_present",
        "value": {
          "kind": "record_fields",
          "fields": {
            "account": "Brazil's Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) uses VitorIA, operational since 2023, to compare the texts of incoming appeals. It groups cases raising similar legal questions for the staff who screen candidates for repercussão geral themes. The court says the tool does not judge cases. On 28 September 2026 the STF described the controversy behind Tema 1.261 (leading case ARE 1441934, on municipal teachers' personal pay advantages). VitorIA identified at least 247 appeals with similar legal questions by grouping on content similarity. The STF added that finding so many similar cases did not determine the result. The theme record shows the Plenary decided unanimously on 22 August 2023 that there is no general repercussion because the question is infraconstitutional. It became final on 23 September 2023. No cited source says what then happened to the 247 appeals. The STF credits VitorIA with four themes in 2023, 19 in 2024 and 11 in 2025. It says these figures do not refer to decisions taken with AI help and do not allow calculating accuracy or time saved.",
            "replication": {
              "produced_by": [
                "Electronic appeals in machine-readable text for VitorIA to compare. The STF's 2021 Victor item documents same-day OCR of all electronic appeals since December 2020. No cited source ties that layer to VitorIA, so the dependency is inferred",
                "Textual-similarity clustering by VitorIA proposing groups of similar appeals",
                "Human screening teams and ministers deciding whether to open a theme and how to rule"
              ],
              "must_hold": [
                "Appeals filed electronically with machine-readable text",
                "A procedural device (repercussão geral themes) that lets one decision govern many appeals",
                "Staff capacity to review proposed clusters"
              ],
              "echoes": [
                {
                  "date": "2024-01-01",
                  "setting": "19 general-repercussion themes created with support from VitorIA data in 2024 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
                  "outcome": "recurred",
                  "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
                },
                {
                  "date": "2025-01-01",
                  "setting": "11 themes created with VitorIA support in 2025 (STF, 28 September 2026; year only)",
                  "outcome": "recurred",
                  "source": "https://noticias.stf.jus.br/postsnoticias/inteligencia-artificial-ajuda-stf-a-identificar-processos-que-discutem-questoes-semelhantes/"
                }
              ]
            }
          }
        },
        "provenance": {
          "kind": "legacy_record",
          "basis": "Preserved from the existing AIBD record; external sources were not rechecked.",
          "record_fields": [
            "account",
            "replication"
          ],
          "source_refs": []
        },
        "review_state": "record_mapped",
        "coverage": "partial"
      }
    },
    "summary": {
      "total": 91,
      "addressed": 91,
      "known": 31,
      "reviewed": 0,
      "record_mapped": 31,
      "not_assessed": 60,
      "complete": false,
      "by_state": {
        "value_present": 31,
        "not_reported": 0,
        "unresolved": 0,
        "not_assessed": 60,
        "not_applicable": 0,
        "withheld": 0,
        "source_unavailable": 0
      }
    }
  }
}