kaal:claim:5541658-010

The Shenzhen courts illustrate a workable three step human-in-the-loop design for generative judicial AI: the judge decides first, the LLM generates the supporting reasoning, and the judge then revises that output to finalize the judgment.

Source quote, verbatim

A notable case study from Shenzhen, China, illustrates a three-step interaction pattern: judges make initial decisions, LLMs generate reasoning based on these decisions, and judges revise the output to finalize judgments.

From

Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law (2025), C. Generative AI for Reasoning, p. 17
https://ssrn.com/abstract=5541658 · source PDF

Cite as

Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5541658

Holds when

Chinese courts using LLMs to draft judicial opinions

Classification

designsupport: evidencedai-and-agents

Verify

The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is e543a2d698fcd522d4d02e034cc9ee1344d0015d2c824b40b9e05ab7c0728c60. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer.
Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/a22a98d4d438ff2a...json
Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5541658-010.md | sha256sum