Tech News

This is the first judge created with artificial intelligence

01-10-2022 Artificial Intelligence POLICY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY FUJITSU-ARCHIVE
01-10-2022 Artificial Intelligence POLICY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY FUJITSU-ARCHIVE

What better way to pay tribute to one of America’s greatest female judges than by creating an artificial intelligence that answers questions related to legal and judicial matters with a tone similar to how the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg did.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a United States lawyer, jurist and judge who worked for 27 years in the Supreme Court of her country, earning notorious recognition for her feminist ideals and her fight for gender equality throughout her career.

Although she passed away in 2020, leaving the North American country in mourning for several days, she recently made headlines again because the “AI21 Labs” technology company designed an artificial intelligence based on the answers she used to make regarding legislative and criminal matters. .

Its objective will be to initially advise people who have concerns in the legal field through a chat that is already available, although for now only in English, however, it can be accessed from anywhere in the world.

To ask questions, you must access the website https://ask-rbg.ai/#ask, where a text box will appear in which you must type the question to be asked, then the AI ​​will answer “Yes”, “No” or “Perhaps”, with a little justification in this regard based on the more than 600,000 words of the US legal spectrum with which this system was programmed. It should be noted that all the comments were made by Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg in interviews, opinions and sentences.

However, like all the most recent innovations in the field of artificial intelligence, this one has not gone unnoticed and on the contrary, it has already been questioned for its performance and the place where human judges would be in a future in which this type of technologies reach high levels of development.

For now, according to Emily Bender, a professor at the University of Washington, this technology is capable of giving answers like a real judge but does not think like onesince “it can return words and the style of them will be based on the text they entered, but it’s not reasoning”.

An interesting fact is that the justice system in the United States has already been implementing different technologies that are helping to calculate the probabilities of recidivism of people with imputed charges or to recover large lost databases, the latter with the use of Blockchain and Machine Learning.

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

On the other hand, questions have also been raised regarding the impartiality of this system. For example, David Martínez, a professor at the Open University of Catalonia (UOC), maintains that if an algorithm is only limited to executing programmed orders, there is no possibility that the mechanical application of the rules will be altered by factors such as prejudices and personal beliefs. , because if it is this way, this type of intelligence does not have elements of subjectivity.

In this sense, Artificial Intelligence could serve as a tool to “unblock” processes in which judges may be affected 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 the Supervision of Artificial Intelligence” has been created, which seeks to evaluate the behavior of this type of technology and help clarify the ethical dilemmas regarding its use in society.

To the above, the magistrate of the European country Luis Villares suggests that, “An algorithm is not capable of detecting the reasons why human behaviors occur, to which this lack of ability to understand emotions also plays a negative role to time to make a judgment

Finally, the also magistrate of Spain, Antonio del Moral, indicates that, “The AI ​​returns hours of work to the magistrates and managers that can be invested in other tasks, such as evaluating the evidence more thoroughly. However, the AI ​​cannot replace judges. Justice, by definition, is human and imperfect, which we assume. Judicial reasoning cannot be put into standardized molds because each citizen deserves a personal solution”.

:

Related Articles

Back to top button