Judicial Artificial Intelligence, American Association of American Law Schools Jurimetrics Committee on Scientific Investigation of Legal Problems, GITAM School of Law

0

As has been shown, technologies have permeated all areas of daily life, including law, with many leading authors questioning traditional roles and the challenges that artificial intelligence applications impose on the profession. .

In 1938, the automatic calculating machine was used in the Ohio State House of Representatives. It was one of the first times the technology was used in the legal environment. However, it was not widely studied until American jurist Loevinger published his 1949 study of “Jurimetrics”, in which the concept of Jurimetrics was created as a reference to the application of automation to contribute to the rationalization of the law, evoking the possibility of predicting judicial decisions on empirical calculations. Later in 1961 the American Association of American Law Schools Jurimetrics Committee on Scientific Investigation of Legal Problems published a report saying that in the field of jurimetry they were more interested in things like using machines to analyze quantitative parts of legal decisions. Therefore, it is clear that the idea of ​​using technology to help judges make decisions was already being considered at the time. It should be noted that in 2018, professors from the University of Southern California and Stanford Law School published research revealing that artificial intelligence is more accurate than lawyers when it comes to reviewing contracts. In India, the Supreme Court of India set up a committee on artificial intelligence in 2022 to examine how AI can be used in the legal field.

Given this context, currently what is meant by the term artificial intelligence refers to a large number of advanced mathematical data processing techniques based on the idea of ​​automation, such as machine learning. depth or artificial neural networks. for the specific case. The latter are techniques based on the biological structure of the human brain, seeking to adapt and reproduce some of its capacities, such as the mental process that judicial operators, such as judges, go through when making a decision. Thus, the application of artificial intelligence in the field of judicial decisions is often called “judicial artificial intelligence”.

In order to analyze the legal issues that may arise as a result of the application of artificial intelligence in judicial decisions, it is necessary to understand at a general level how these tools work. The first thing is that they operate under the concept of predictive analytics, where behavior patterns are provided. It is a tool based on the analysis of massive singular data, which is used to try to predict future decisions based on the systematic study of decisions already produced.

These mechanisms are based on predictive algorithms implemented to carry out actions or recommendations, from a set of existing data, based on models and probabilities. All the context and programming is carried out by human beings who, thanks to the information they adapt and the algorithms they generate to relate the variables, determine the predictive behavior of the machine as a whole. In this way, from a set of data, patterns and relationships between variables are determined to establish a prediction regarding a certain future behavior.

The information used for programming the expert system requires the joint collaboration of the programmer and the legal analysts, since the quality and quantity of the information will depend on what each deems appropriate, given the complexity of the type of problems to be solved. . developed, requiring considerable knowledge of the field to be treated. It should also be noted that expert systems must be constantly updated with new information, so that they can provide forecasts in line with the state of affairs at a given time.

When it comes to court rulings, the information that expert systems need to be programmed with needs to be fully aligned with a country’s legal system, which involves regulations at different levels, i.e. laws , decrees, regulations, circulars, among others, as well as the judgments of the main courts and tribunals, which allow a complete analysis to be made at the time of the problem under consideration. These predictive analytics mechanisms work within expert legal systems, which help judges make decisions by proposing possible solutions to given legal problems, applying the specialized knowledge built into their system to a given case.

An expert system is a set of artificial intelligence logical procedures that allow computers to help humans analyze situations and make decisions. These are then databases that not only possess knowledge, but also a set of conditional rules that link the knowledge in an operational way. In general, therefore, an expert system differs from a database in which data is stored statically, whereas in expert systems data is dynamic, which not only reports information, but also links it to the cases to be dealt with. ; in this way, the information is processed as a human expert in this field would.

With regard to the specific case, legal expert systems are programs that are adapted to act as intelligent legal operators, aiming to find solutions to the legal problems presented to them by means of the information contained in their databases. Finally, it should be taken into account that expert legal systems need, in order to provide their solution, to have contact with the user, which in most cases is done through a system of questions where the system receives the information necessary to carry out the appropriate processing allowing it to provide an answer. Thus, the expert system will be able to advise the user as long as the latter interacts with the program by providing him with orientations on which he must make a decision.

From what has been said so far, we can conclude on the one hand that, as we have insisted, the application of artificial intelligence to law does not have the objective of expert systems making the decision, but to help the judiciary to have all the regulatory means and jurisprudential elements applicable in a decision, accelerating the investigation process, while basing them on purely objective questions.

Therefore, by basing judicial decisions on objective matters, without undue influence of aspects of human nature such as states of mind, beliefs, etc., it is possible to ensure greater impartiality and accuracy in the decision itself, which increases confidence in judges and gives legal certainty to the general public, thereby increasing the favor of the judiciary.

Finally, the responsibility for the decisions taken must rest with the judge, who is the one who, with his own reasoning, makes the decision he deems appropriate in the specific case, without this being attributed to the creators or designers or to the tool him. -same. However, the designer must take responsibility when creating the system to ensure that it complies with the principles of the law.

Author: Dr. YV Kiran Kumar (Assistant Professor, GITAM School of Law, Visakhapatnam) and MR Harish Kumar Varma (Assistant Professor, GITAM School of Law, Visakhapatnam). Views are personal.

Share.

About Author

Comments are closed.