人工智能证据在民事诉讼中的作用与地位

M. Sokolova
{"title":"人工智能证据在民事诉讼中的作用与地位","authors":"M. Sokolova","doi":"10.18690/mls.16.1.169-190.2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n \nThis article examines the role and position of AI evidence in civil litigation. Despite the sporadic appearance of such evidence in court proceedings, it has the potential to revolutionize the evidential field and change our understanding of the nature and evidential qualities of existing types of evidence. After a thorough examination of the key technical specifications of AI, different classifications of AI evidence and various approaches to treatment of AI evidence, the author suggests how AI evidence should be treated according to the Slovenian Civil Procedure law. It is inferred that standard evidence rules can be applied to AI evidence, if the probative value of such evidence does not depend on the AI involved. In cases where probative value of evidence depends on the involved AI system, AI evidence can nevertheless be treated as witness or expert evidence, or, precisely, as ex parte affidavit or private expert opinion depending on the level of human or AI contribution to the content of AI evidence. The author concludes that black box and bias problems of AI systems generating evidence have to be properly addressed in order for AI evidence to achieve full evidential value and reliability. \n \n \n \n","PeriodicalId":227174,"journal":{"name":"Medicine, Law & Society","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role and Position of AI Evidence in Civil Litigation\",\"authors\":\"M. Sokolova\",\"doi\":\"10.18690/mls.16.1.169-190.2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n \\nThis article examines the role and position of AI evidence in civil litigation. Despite the sporadic appearance of such evidence in court proceedings, it has the potential to revolutionize the evidential field and change our understanding of the nature and evidential qualities of existing types of evidence. After a thorough examination of the key technical specifications of AI, different classifications of AI evidence and various approaches to treatment of AI evidence, the author suggests how AI evidence should be treated according to the Slovenian Civil Procedure law. It is inferred that standard evidence rules can be applied to AI evidence, if the probative value of such evidence does not depend on the AI involved. In cases where probative value of evidence depends on the involved AI system, AI evidence can nevertheless be treated as witness or expert evidence, or, precisely, as ex parte affidavit or private expert opinion depending on the level of human or AI contribution to the content of AI evidence. The author concludes that black box and bias problems of AI systems generating evidence have to be properly addressed in order for AI evidence to achieve full evidential value and reliability. \\n \\n \\n \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":227174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medicine, Law & Society\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medicine, Law & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18690/mls.16.1.169-190.2023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine, Law & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18690/mls.16.1.169-190.2023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文探讨了人工智能证据在民事诉讼中的作用和地位。尽管这类证据在法庭诉讼中偶尔出现,但它有可能彻底改变证据领域,改变我们对现有证据类型的性质和证据质量的理解。在深入研究了人工智能的关键技术规范、人工智能证据的不同分类以及人工智能证据的各种处理方法后,作者建议根据斯洛文尼亚民事诉讼法如何处理人工智能证据。由此推断,如果人工智能证据的证明价值不依赖于所涉及的人工智能,则标准证据规则可以适用于人工智能证据。在证据的证明价值取决于所涉及的人工智能系统的情况下,人工智能证据仍然可以被视为证人或专家证据,或者,准确地说,作为单方面的宣誓书或私人专家意见,这取决于人类或人工智能对人工智能证据内容的贡献程度。作者的结论是,为了使人工智能证据实现充分的证据价值和可靠性,必须妥善解决人工智能系统产生证据的黑箱和偏见问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Role and Position of AI Evidence in Civil Litigation
This article examines the role and position of AI evidence in civil litigation. Despite the sporadic appearance of such evidence in court proceedings, it has the potential to revolutionize the evidential field and change our understanding of the nature and evidential qualities of existing types of evidence. After a thorough examination of the key technical specifications of AI, different classifications of AI evidence and various approaches to treatment of AI evidence, the author suggests how AI evidence should be treated according to the Slovenian Civil Procedure law. It is inferred that standard evidence rules can be applied to AI evidence, if the probative value of such evidence does not depend on the AI involved. In cases where probative value of evidence depends on the involved AI system, AI evidence can nevertheless be treated as witness or expert evidence, or, precisely, as ex parte affidavit or private expert opinion depending on the level of human or AI contribution to the content of AI evidence. The author concludes that black box and bias problems of AI systems generating evidence have to be properly addressed in order for AI evidence to achieve full evidential value and reliability.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信