The possibilities and limits of AI in Chinese judicial judgment

AI and Society:1-11 (forthcoming)

Abstract

Artificial intelligence technology has brought new opportunities and challenges to the judicial field, which dramatically improves judicial efficiency and may even change the judiciary's way. The concept of judicial justice in the information age has a natural affinity with artificial intelligence. As artificial intelligence continues to make breakthroughs in judicial data sorting and deep learning knowledge, judicial artificial intelligence has gradually become a reality. Artificial intelligence can conduct legal argumentation, interpret calculation results, human–computer collaboration, and judicial judgment. At the same time, the development of artificial intelligence technology also has potential risks, such as algorithm black boxes, algorithm discrimination, etc., to help judges achieve judicial justice, the value of judicial justice should be pursued to the limit of its judicial application. Therefore, artificial intelligence justice should be constrained by social relations, legal rationality, and code operation.

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,855

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-07-07

Downloads
11 (#859,778)

6 months
4 (#162,539)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Yang Zhao
University of Georgia

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Anderson V Dredd [2137] Mega-City LR 1.Thomas Giddens - 2017 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 30 (3):389-405.
La argumentación judicial: control y responsabilidad de los órganos jurisdiccionales.Manuel Segura Ortega - 2011 - Telos: Revista Iberoamericana de Estudios Utilitaristas 18 (1):197-229.
Negotiating Values: Narrative and Exposition.J. R. Martin - 2008 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (1):41-55.
Beyond Moral Judgment.Alice Crary - 2007 - Harvard University Press.
On Understanding and Being Understood – The Judicial System, Communication and the Public.Anne-José Paulsen - 2019 - In Knut Almestad, Jean-Luc Baechler, Benedikt Bogason, Henrik Bull, Francis Delaporte, Luis José Diez Canseco Núñez, Peter Freeman, Vladimir Golitsyn, Irmgard Griss, Marc Jaeger, Koen Lenaerts, Paul Mahoney, Andreas Mundt, Sven Norberg, Toril Marie Øie, Þorgeir Örlygsson, Anne-José Paulsen, Georges Ravarani, Hubertus Schumacher, Vassilios Skouris, Gian-Flurin Steinegger, Sven Erik Svedman, Antonio Tizzano, Marc van der Woude, Bo Vesterdorf & Jean-Claude Wiwinius (eds.), The Art of Judicial Reasoning: Festschrift in Honour of Carl Baudenbacher. Springer Verlag.
On The Sufficiency of Legal Arguments.Li Zhao & Ming Yuan - 2007 - Modern Philosophy 2:118-122.
Clinical Judgment, Moral Anxiety, and the Limits of Psychiatry.Bradley Murray - 2017 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (4):495-501.