Three Laws Blog: Law and Artificial Intelligence

Eliot on The Dangers of Miscalculating Human Behavior Via Robo-Judges @LanceEliot

Lance B. Eliot, Stanford Center for Legal Informatics, has published The Dangers Of Miscalculating Human Behavior Via Robo-Judges. Here is the abstract.

There has been a trend lately of suggesting that robot judges (so-called robo-judges) will be able to determine the guilt of a defendant by merely using state-of-the-art sensory devices to watch and hear the accused. Besides the questionable aspects of whether this can or should be done, it also misportrays what AI-based judge-related systems might genuinely provide as an added value to adjudication.

Download the essay from SSRN at the link.

Sourdin on Judge v. Robot: "The Rise of Machines Is Upon Us" @TaniaSourdin

Tania Sourdin, University of Newcastle, Newcastle Law School (Australia), has published Judge v Robot: "The Rise of Machines Is Upon Us."

As technology continues to change the way in which we work and function, there are predictions that many aspects of human activity will be replaced by technology and that work activities previously carried out by humans will increasingly be conducted or carried out by replacement technologies. Whilst many human activities have changed over time as a result of human advances, more recent shifts in the context of technological change are likely to have a broader impact on some human functions that have previously been largely undisturbed. In this regard, technology is already changing the practise of law and may for example, reshape the process of judging by either replacing, supporting or supplementing the judicial role. The changes are likely to be significant because the fourth industrial revolution with an unparalleled focussed on artificial intelligence is directed at almost all human activities. As a result, judging, particularly in terms of the adjudicative function, is arguably more susceptible to change than at any point in the last two centuries. Such changes may limit the extent to which humans are engaged in judging with an increasing emphasis on artificial intelligence to deal with smaller civil disputes and the more routine use of related technologies in more complex disputes.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Zeleznikow on Whether Artificial Intelligence and Online Dispute Resolution Can Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveneness In Courts @VicUniWgtn

John Zeleznikow, Victoria University, is publishing Can Artificial Intelligence and Online Dispute Resolution Enhance Efficiency and Effectiveness in Courts in volume 8 of International Journal for Court Administration (May 2017). Here is the abstract.

The growing rise in the number of self-represented litigants has negative implications for both the court system and access to justice. The expanding use of Artificial Intelligence and the World Wide Web has led to the development and use of Online Dispute Resolution. In this article, we investigate a number of systems in Australian Family Law that enhance Alternative Dispute Resolution and Access to Justice. We discuss how a hybrid system that incorporates advice about Best Alternatives to Negotiated Agreements (BATNAs) and potential trade-offs as well as allowing online communication can enhance access to justice.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

van den Herik and van Eijk on Big Data and Judicial Decisions; Practicing Law and Artificial Intelligence @Leiden Law

Jaap van den Herik, Leiden Law School, and Rob van Eijk, Leiden Law School (Students), have published Big Data and Judicial Decisions; Practicing Law and Artificial Intelligence (Presentation Slides). Here is the abstract.

Presentation part of the LERU Summer School 2016: Data Stewardship for Scientific Discovery and Innovation (Leiden, 10-15 July 2016) The presentation leads to two conclusions against the background of big data, artificial intelligence, and a changing legal landscape. The presentation contains examples of Chess, Go, and a smart thermostat.

Download the article and presentation from SSRN at the link.

AI and Judicial Decision-Making

AI might be able to predict how judges might rule, based on fact patterns in cases, according to a new paper published in Peer J Computer Science. The paper by Nikolaos Aletras  Dimitrios Tsarapatsania, Daniel Preotiuc-Pietro, and Vasileios Lampos, uses predictive models to analyze these patterns. Read the paper here,  and read more about it here in a Wall Street Journal blogpost by Jacob Gershman.