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:牛犁耘 Niu Liyun(Henan University of Economics and Law,Zhengzhou 450046,China)
机构地区:[1]河南财经政法大学法学院,河南郑州450046
出 处:《河南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2023年第5期56-62,共7页Journal of Henan Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)
摘 要:人工智能技术的广泛应用推动了智慧法院建设,以协助法官审查科学证据、辅助量刑、类案推送等为典型的“人工智能+司法”格局下,人工智能与司法裁判的融合不断深化。但这种深度渗透在一定程度上存在技术反噬司法的风险,技术智能化与司法固有属性之间存在内在张力。从司法公正的角度审视人工智能司法应用,应妥善处理司法价值功效与技术中性之间的关系,尊重法官司法价值判断;坚持法官主体性、主导性,划定技术与司法的边界;通过优化司法大数据管理,防范算法缺陷,最终助力智慧司法的良性发展。The wide application of artificial intelligence technology has promoted the construction of intelligent court.Under the typical pattern of“artificial intelligence and justice”,such as assisting judges to review scientific evidence,assisting sentencing,and pushing class cases,the integration of artificial intelligence and judicial judgment has been intensified.However,this kind of deep penetration has the risk that technology will bite the judiciary to some extent,and there is an inherent tension between technical intelligence and the inherent attributes of justice.To examine the judicial application of AI from the perspective of judicial fairness,we should properly deal with the relationship between the efficacy of judicial value and technologyneutrality,respect the judicial judgment from the judge,adhere to the judge’s subjectivity and dominance,and delimit the boundary between technology and justice.By optimizing judicial big data management and preventing algorithm defects,it will ultimately assist the positive development of judicial intelligence.
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:13.58.229.23