检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:韩世鹏 秦勇[1] HAN Shi-peng;QIN Yong(School of Humanities and Law,China University of Petroleum,Qingdao Shangdong 266555,China)
机构地区:[1]中国石油大学(华东)文法学院,山东青岛266555
出 处:《淮阴工学院学报》2022年第2期40-45,共6页Journal of Huaiyin Institute of Technology
基 金:中国石油大学(华东)研究生创新工程资助项目(YCX2021158)。
摘 要:算法时代下,现有法律规范与技术伦理难以应对智能司法带来的模糊性、非指涉性风险,因此,当前有必要对智能司法的法理逻辑与决策限度进行理性思考。基于合法性、合道德性以及合理性的正当证成,人工智能介入司法程序有益于提升司法效率,重塑司法智慧;但在决策限度层面,应当明确审判权不可让渡的权力限度、法官责任主体的责任限度以及坚守法官主导的主体限度。In the age of algorithms,it is difficult for law specification and technoligical ethics to deal with the vague and non-referential risks brought by intelligent justice.Therefore,it is necessary to consider the legal logic and decision-making limits of intelligent justice.Based on the justification of legitimacy,morality,and rationality,the intervention of artificial intelligence in judicial procedures is conducive to improving judicial efficiency and reshaping judicial wisdom;however,at the level of decision-making limits,the limits of inalienable judicial power and the responsibilities of judges should be clarified.The limit of the subject's responsibility and the limit of the subject that sticks to the judge's leadership.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.38