Generative AI in judicial settings is far from perfect: it can oversimplify complex judicial deliberations, reduce emotive and cognitive processes to statistical correlations, and introduce biases or interpretive errors.
Source quote, verbatim
However, these applications are far from perfect, as generative AI can oversimplify complex judicial deliberations, reduce emotive-cognitive processes to statistical correlations, and introduce biases or interpretive errors.
From
Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law (2025), Judicial Decision-Making Tools, p. 13 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
judges using tools such as GPT-4 to draft rulings or analyze arguments
The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is e543a2d698fcd522d4d02e034cc9ee1344d0015d2c824b40b9e05ab7c0728c60. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer. Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/5080f4a5bc98a48b...json Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5541658-037.md | sha256sum