Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law
metadata only
Neuroscientists in Court
Neuroscientific evidence is increasingly being offered in court cases. Consequently, the legal system needs neuroscientists to act as expert witnesses who can explain the limitations and interpretations of neuroscientific findings so that judges and jurors can make informed and appropriate inference
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Is Science Neurotic?#95765
- 2 U.S.C. § 195 — Fees of witnesses in District of Columbia#558462
- 28 U.S.C. § 2506 — Interest of witness#556719
- Toward evidence-based neuroarchitecture: a systematic mapping and framework for immersive spatial cognition.#1053998
- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND FORMALISMS FOR LEGAL EVIDENCE: AN INTRODUCTION#679140
Record · ID 1019593
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive