# kaal:claim:5541658-031

**Claim.** Experimental studies suggest risks such as bias amplification from judicial AI, but there is little empirical data on how those risks actually manifest in operational courtrooms, which leaves practical integration guidelines undeveloped.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- the gap between experimental and deployed judicial AI systems

**Source quote.**

> While experimental studies suggest risks like bias amplification, there is little empirical data on how these risks manifest in operational judicial settings.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, *The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law* (2025), Insufficient Exploration of Real-World Judicial AI Applications, page 33

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

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `e543a2d698fcd522d4d02e034cc9ee1344d0015d2c824b40b9e05ab7c0728c60` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Gray%20-%202025%20-%20The%20Evolving%20Role%20of%20Artificial%20Intelligence%20in%20Law.pdf

**Failure mode.** absent real-world deployment evidence  (family: research-design-limitation)

**Topics.** empirical-evidence

**Keywords.** research-gaps, bias-amplification, deployment, empirical-evidence

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.