Litigation-Generated Science: Why Should We Care?

BACKGROUND: In a 1994 Ninth Circuit decision on the remand of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Judge Alex Kosinski wrote that science done for the purpose of litigation should be subject to more stringent standards of admissibility than other science. OBJECTIVES: We analyze this proposition by considering litigation-generated science as a subset of science involving conflict of interest. DISCUSSION: Judge Kosinski's formulation suggests there may be reasons to treat science involving conflict of interest differently but raises questions about whether litigation-generated science should be singled out. In particular we discuss the similar problems raised by strategically motivated science done in anticipation of possible future litigation or otherwise designed to benefit the sponsor and ask what special treatment, if any, should be given to science undertaken to support existing or potential future litigation. CONCLUSION: The problems with litigation-generated science are not special. On the contrary, they are very general and apply to much or most science that is relevant and reliable in the courtroom setting.

BU Computer Science 1998 Proxy Trace: Release Notes

In a recent paper (Changes in Web Client Access Patterns: Characteristics and Caching Implications by Barford, Bestavros, Bradley, and Crovella) we performed a variety of analyses upon user traces collected in the Boston University Computer Science department in 1995 and 1998. A sanitized version of the 1995 trace has been publicly available for some time; the 1998 trace has now been sanitized, and is available from: http://www.cs.bu.edu/techreports/1999-011-usertrace-98.gz ftp://ftp.cs.bu.edu/techreports/1999-011-usertrace-98.gz This memo discusses the format of this public version of the log, and includes additional discussion of how the data was collected, how the log was sanitized, what this log is and is not useful for, and areas of potential future research interest.