This is the first judge created with artificial intelligence

01-10-2022 Artificial Intelligence Research and Technologies FUJITSU-ARCHIVE

What better way to honor one of America’s greatest female judges than by creating an artificial intelligence that answers questions about legal and judicial issues in a tone similar to what the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg did.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a United States lawyer, jurist, and judge who served for 27 years on her country’s Supreme Court, gaining well-known recognition for her feminist ideals and her fight for gender equality throughout her career.

Although she passed away in 2020, and left her North American country in mourning for several days, she recently made headlines because technology company AI21 Labs built artificial intelligence based on the answers it used to provide regarding legislative and criminal matters.

Its goal will be to initially advise people with concerns in the legal field through a chat that is already available, although at the moment it is only in English, however, it can be accessed from anywhere in the world.

To ask questions, you must access the site https://ask-rbg.ai/#ask, where a text box will appear where the question to be asked must be typed, later the AI ​​will answer ‘yes’, ‘no’ or ‘maybe’, with a small justification based on more than 600,000 words from the US legal code spectrum with which this system is programmed. Notably, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg made all comments in interviews, opinions, and sentences.

However, like all the latest innovations in the field of artificial intelligence, this innovation has not gone unnoticed, on the contrary, it has already been questioned about its performance and where human judges will be in the future in which this kind of technology will reach High levels of sophistication.

See also  Reusable spacecraft mid-air somersault ship

For now, according to Emily Bender, a professor at the University of Washington, This technology is able to give answers like a real judge but does not think like itsince “it can return words and its style will depend on the text entered, but it is not a logical reason”.

An interesting fact is that the US justice system has already started applying various technologies that help in calculating the odds of returning people charged with fees or recovering large lost databases, the latter using Blockchain and Machine Learning.

Likewise, this Ginsburg-inspired AI is already being applied to some procedures of the country’s judicial, legal and criminal institutions.

On the other hand, questions were raised about the neutrality of this system. For example, David Martínez, a professor at the Open University of Catalonia (UOC), asserts that if an algorithm is limited only to executing programmed commands, then there is no possibility of changing the mechanical application of rules by factors such as personal biases and beliefs, because if so, then this The type of intelligence does not contain subjective elements.

In this sense, AI can act as a tool to “unblock” processes in which judges may be influenced by the emotions of the moment, although they are not exempt from making mistakes.

An example of the above is Spain, where the “Spanish Agency for Supervision of Artificial Intelligence” was created, which seeks to assess the behavior of this type of technology and help clarify ethical dilemmas related to its use in society.

To the above, European state judge Luis Villares suggests that “the algorithm is unable to discover the reasons for the occurrence of human behaviors, as this lack of ability to understand emotions also plays a negative role for time to make a judgment

See also  The best Arab YouTube channels contribute to the dissemination of meaningful content

Finally, the investigating judge in Spain, Antonio del Moral, notes that “AI returns working hours to judges and directors that could be invested in other tasks, such as more comprehensively evaluating evidence. However, AI cannot replace judges Justice, by definition, is humane and imperfect, and that is what we assume. Judicial thinking cannot be put into uniform molds because every citizen deserves a personal solution.”

Read on:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.