Cân bằng cán cân: điều hướng các thách thức đạo đức và thực tiễn trong việc tích hợp trí tuệ nhân tạo (AI) vào các hoạt động pháp lý
Tóm tắt
Bài viết khám phá việc tích hợp trí tuệ nhân tạo vào thực hành pháp lý, thảo luận về các vấn đề đạo đức và thực tiễn phát sinh cũng như ảnh hưởng của nó đến các quy trình pháp lý truyền thống. Nó nhấn mạnh sự chuyển đổi từ thực hành pháp lý cần nhiều lao động sang các phương pháp công nghệ hiện đại, với trọng tâm là tiềm năng của trí tuệ nhân tạo trong việc nâng cao khả năng tiếp cận dịch vụ pháp lý và đơn giản hóa quy trình pháp lý. Cuộc thảo luận này đặt ra những thách thức đạo đức quan trọng do việc tích hợp trí tuệ nhân tạo, với trọng tâm cụ thể là các vấn đề về thiên lệch và tính minh bạch. Những lo ngại về đạo đức này trở nên đặc biệt quan trọng trong bối cảnh các lĩnh vực pháp lý nhạy cảm, bao gồm nhưng không giới hạn ở tranh chấp quyền nuôi con, công lý hình sự và thỏa thuận ly hôn. Nó nhấn mạnh sự cần thiết phải duy trì cảnh giác về đạo đức, ủng hộ việc phát triển và triển khai các hệ thống AI có cam kết sâu sắc với sự toàn vẹn đạo đức. Cách tiếp cận này rất quan trọng để bảo đảm sự công bằng và duy trì tính minh bạch trong tất cả các thủ tục tư pháp. Nghiên cứu đề xuất một chiến lược "con người trong quy trình" kết hợp giữa kiến thức con người và các kỹ thuật AI nhằm giảm thiểu thiên lệch và đảm bảo kết quả pháp lý cá nhân hóa để đảm bảo AI hoạt động như một phần bổ sung chứ không phải thay thế. Bài viết kết luận bằng cách nhấn mạnh sự cần thiết phải bảo tồn yếu tố con người trong các hoạt động pháp lý.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Kumar R. Biases in artificial intelligence applications affecting human life: a review. IJRTE. 2021. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.A5719.0510121.
Said G, Azamat K, Ravshan S, Bokhadir A. Adapting legal systems to the development of artificial intelligence: solving the global problem of AI in judicial processes. Int J Cyber Law. 2023. https://doi.org/10.59022/ijcl.49.
Carlson A. Imagining an AI-supported self-help portal for divorce. Judges J. 2020;59:26.
Surden H. Artificial intelligence and law: an overview. Ga St U L Rev. 2020. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788972826.00014.
Bell F. Family law, access to justice, and automation. Macquarie Law J. 2019. https://doi.org/10.3316/INFORMIT.394292323421222.
Conrad JG et al. AI & law: formative developments, state-of-the-art approaches, challenges & opportunities 2023. https://doi.org/10.1145/3570991.3571050
Kasap GH, Can artificial intelligence ("AI") replace human arbitrators? Technol Concerns Legal Implicat. J Disp Resol. 2021
Making decisions: bias in artificial intelligence and data-driven diagnostic tools. AJGP 2023;52(7):439. https://doi.org/10.31128/AJGP-12-22-6630.
Sinwar D, et al. Assessing and mitigating bias in artificial intelligence: a review. Adv in Comp Sci and Comm. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2174/2666255816666230523114425%3e.
Schuett J. Defining the scope of AI regulations. Law Innov Technol. 2023;15(1):60. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184135.
Sheikh H, Prins C, Schrijvers E. Artificial intelligence: definition and background’ in mission ai: research for policy. Cham: Springer; 2023. (10.1007/978-3-031-21448-6_2).
Mickunas A, Pilotta JJ. A critical understanding of artificial intelligence: a phenomenological foundation 2023. https://doi.org/10.2174/97898151234011230101
Brynjolfsson E, Rock D, Syverson C, Artificial intelligence and the modern productivity paradox: a clash of expectations and statistics 2017. https://doi.org/10.3386/W24001
Haenlein M, Kaplan A. A brief history of artificial intelligence: on the past, present, and future of artificial intelligence. Calif Manag Rev. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619864925.
Villata S, Araszkiewicz M, Ashley K, et al. Thirty years of artificial intelligence and law: the third decade. Artif Intell Law. 2022;30:561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-022-09327-6.
Zhang C, Yang L. Study on artificial intelligence: the state of the art and future prospects. J Indus Inf Integr. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100224.
Al-Surmi A, Bashiri M, Koliousis I. AI-based decision making: combining strategies to improve operational performance. Int J Prod Res. 2022;60(14):4464. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.1966540.
Fabregat-Hernández A, Palanca J, Botti VJ. Exploring explainable AI: category theory insights into machine learning algorithms. Mach Learn Sci Technol. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1088/2632-2153/ad1534.
Matulionyte R, Hanif A, A Call for More Explainable AI in Law Enforcement. In: 2021 IEEE 25th International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW) 2021, 75–80
Ramachandran G, Kannan S. Artificial intelligence and deep learning applications: a review. J Environ Impact Manag Policy. 2021. https://doi.org/10.55529/jeimp.12.1.4.
Balda ER, Behboodi A, Mathar R. Adversarial examples in deep neural networks: an overview in studies in computational intelligence 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31760-7_2
Jackson E, Mendoza C. Setting the record straight: what the COMPAS core risk and need assessment is and is not. Harvard Data Sci Rev. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.1b3dadaa.
Huq AZ. Racial equity in algorithmic criminal justice. Duke Law J. 2019;68:1043.
Nogueira MG, et al E-discovery as a mean to improve information security. In: presented at the 2017 Computing Conference https://doi.org/10.1109/SAI.2017.8252214.
Fernández-Martínez C, Fernández A. AI and recruiting software: ethical and legal implications. Paladyn. 2020;11(1):P199. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2020-0030.
Qu Y, Zhang Z, Bai B, The way forward for legal knowledge engineers in the big data era with the impact of AI technology. In: Presented at the 6th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Big Data (ICAIBD), Chengdu, China, 2023, 225 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAIBD57115.2023.10206169.
Myers C. E-discovery and public relations practice: how digital communication affects litigation. 11 Public Relat J 2017:11.
Kaul N. A brief review on rule-based systems. J Emerg Technol Innov Res. 2019;6(2):79.
Islam MB, Governatori G. RuleRS: a rule-based architecture for decision support systems. Artif Intell Law. 2018;26:315.
Laato S, Tiainen M, Islam AKMN, Mäntymäki M. How to explain AI systems to end users: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Internet Res. 2022;32(7):1. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-08-2021-0600.
Feng KJK et al. Case repositories: towards case-based reasoning for ai alignment (2023) arXiv (Cornell University). 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2311.10934.
Ashley KD. An AI model of case-based legal argument from a jurisprudential viewpoint. Artif Intell Law. 2002;10:163.
Sallu S, et al. Learning in higher education based on artificial intelligence (AI) with case based reasoning (CBR). J Namibian Stud History Politics Cult. 2023. https://doi.org/10.59670/jns.v34i.1191.
Razmetaeva Y, Satokhina N. AI-based decisions and disappearance of law. Masaryk Univ J Law Technol. 2022;16(2):241. https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2022-2-5.
McPeak A, Disruptive Technology and the Ethical Lawyer. 50 University of Toledo Law Review. 2019.
Nersessian D, Mancha R. From automation to autonomy: legal and ethical responsibility gaps in artificial intelligence innovation. Michigan Technol Law Rev. 2021;27:55. https://doi.org/10.36645/mtlr.27.1.
Wang ZJ. Between constancy and change: legal practice and legal education in the age of technology. Law Context Socio-Legal J. 2019;36(1):64. https://doi.org/10.26826/law-in-context.v36i1.87.
Garingan D, Pickard A. Artificial intelligence in legal practice: exploring theoretical frameworks for algorithmic literacy in the legal information profession. Legal Inf Manag. 2021;21(2):97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1472669621000190.
Armour J, Parnham R, Sako M. Unlocking the potential of AI for English law. Int J Legal Profess. 2020;28(1):65. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695958.2020.1857765.
Blankley KM. Online resources and family cases: access to justice in implementation of a plan. Fordham Law Rev. 2020;88:2121–41.
Kasap GH. Can Artificial Intelligence ("AI") replace human arbitrators? Technological concerns and legal implications. Journal of Dispute Resolution. 2021. https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol2021/iss2/5.
Janier M, Reed C. Towards a theory of close analysis for dispute mediation discourse. Argumentation. 2015;31(1):45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-015-9386-y.
Golovko and V Druz. Mediation and arbitration: a legal dilemma. Law Innov Soc 2020;2(15):3. https://doi.org/10.37772/2309-9275-2020-2(15)-12.
Mota FB, Braga LAM, Cabral BP. Alternative dispute resolution research landscape from 1981 to 2022. Grp Decision Negot. 2023;32:1415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-023-09848-8.
Peters S. The evolution of alternative dispute resolution and online dispute resolution in the European UN. CES Derecho. 2021;12(1):3. https://doi.org/10.21615/cesder.12.1.1.
Thompson D. Creating new pathways to justice using simple artificial intelligence and online dispute resolution. Int J Online Dispute Resolut. 2015. https://doi.org/10.5553/ijodr/235250102015002001002.
Batdulam M. Developing the legal regulation of online dispute resolution. Rev Br Alternat Dispute Resolut. 2023. https://doi.org/10.52028/rbadr.v5i10.art11.nz.
Zeleznikow J. Using artificial intelligence to provide intelligent dispute resolution support. Grp Decision Negot. 2021;30:789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-021-09734-1.
Trinder L et al. Litigants in Person in Private Family Law Cases (Ministry of Justice Analytical Series, 2014) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7e2218ed915d74e33f0448/litigants-in-person-in-private-family-law-cases.pdf.
Alessa H. The role of artificial intelligence in online dispute resolution: a brief and critical overview. Inf Commun Technol Law. 2022;31(3):319. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2022.2088060.
Bell F. Family law, access to justice, and automation. Macq Law J. 2019. https://doi.org/10.3316/INFORMIT.394292323421222.
Cath C. Governing artificial intelligence: ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2018;376(2133):20180080. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0080.
Herdiyanti SH, Kurniati H, Ras H. Ethical challenges in the practice of the legal profession in the digital era. Formosa J Soc Sci. 2023;2(4):685. https://doi.org/10.55927/fjss.v2i4.7451.
Davis AE. The future of law firms (and Lawyers) in the age of artificial intelligence. Rev GV. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-6172201945.
Zhang SX, Roberts RE, Farabee D. An analysis of prisoner reentry and parole risk using COMPAS and traditional criminal history measures. Crime Delinq. 2011;60(2):167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128711426544.
Yu PK. Artificial intelligence, the law-machine interface, and fair use automation. Alabama Law Rev. 2020;72(1):187.
Završnik A. Algorithmic justice: algorithms and big data in criminal justice settings. Eur J Criminol. 2021;18(5):623. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370819876762.
Smith LS, Frazer E. Child custody innovations for family lawyers: the future is now. Family Law Q. 2017;51(2/3):193.
Angwin J et al. Machine Bias (ProPublica) https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing. Accessed 20 Dec 2023.
VanBenschoten SW, et al. 'Federal Probation. 2016 https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/usct10024-fedprobation-sept2016_0.pdf.
Lagioia F, Rovatti R, Sartor G. Algorithmic fairness through group parities? The Case of COMPAS-SAPMOC. AI Soc. 2023;38:459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01441-y.
Grgić-Hlača N, Redmiles EM, Gummadi KP, Weller A, Human perceptions of fairness in algorithmic decision making: a case study of criminal risk prediction. In: WWW 2018: The 2018 Web Conference (2018) https://mlg.eng.cam.ac.uk/adrian/WWW18-HumanPerceptions.pdf.
Dressel J, Farid H. the accuracy, fairness, and limits of predicting recidivism. Sci Adv. 2018;4(1):eaao5580. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao5580.
M Spielkamp, 'Inspecting Algorithms for Bias' (MIT Technology Review) https://www.technologyreview.com/2017/06/12/105804/inspecting-algorithms-for-bias/. Accessed 2 Apr 2020.
Andrada G, Clowes RW, Smart PR. Varieties of transparency: exploring agency within AI systems. AI Soc. 2022;38(4):1321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01326-6.
Haresamudram K, Larsson S, Heintz F. Three levels of AI transparency. Computer. 2023;56(2):93. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2022.3213181.
Wulf AJ, Seizov O. Artificial intelligence and transparency: a blueprint for improving the regulation of AI applications in the EU. Eur Bus Law Rev. 2020;31(4):611. https://doi.org/10.54648/EULR2020024.
Islam MMM, Shuford J. A survey of ethical considerations in ai: navigating the landscape of bias and fairness. J Artif Intell Gen Sci. 2024. https://doi.org/10.60087/jaigs.v1i1.27.
Akindele R, Adewuyi SJ. Navigating the ethical and legal terrains of AI tool deployment: a comparative legal analysis. Commun IIMA. 2023. https://doi.org/10.58729/1941-6687.1449.
Wevorce: About Us, Private Divorce, and Private Judges™. 2020 https://www.wevorce.com/about-us/.
SmartSettle: Collaborative Negotiation Systems | SmartSettle ONE & Infinity. Smartsettle. https://www.smartsettle.com/.
CoParenter Team. 'Co-parenting' CoParenter. https://coparenter.com/co-parenting/.
Artificial lawyer. Divorce bot launches, a family law legal bot. (Artificial Lawyer, 2023). https://www.artificiallawyer.com/2017/02/21/divorce-bot-launches-the-family-law-legal-bot/.
Tools for Conflict Free Co-Parenting. OurFamilyWizard https://www.ourfamilywizard.co.uk/.
Machina L, Legal analytics - the winning edge for law firms. 2023. https://lexmachina.com/law-firms/.
Remus D, Levy F. Can robots be lawyers: computers, lawyers, and the practice of law. Geo J Legal Ethics. 2017;30:501.
Zeleznikow J. Split up: an intelligent decision support system which provides advice upon property division following divorce. Int J Law Inf Technol. 2002;6(2):190. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/6.2.190.
Pappas S. Birds are not real: exploring the toulmin model of argumentation. Commun Teacher. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/17404622.2023.2300702.
Naveed S, Donkers T, Ziegler J, Argumentation-based explanations in recommender systems: conceptual framework and empirical results. In: Adjunct Publication of the 26th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization. 2018 https://doi.org/10.1145/3213586.3225240.
Marsden G, Siedel GJ. The duty to negotiate in good faith: are BATNA strategies legal? Berkeley Bus Law J. 2017;14(1):127. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z386688J21.
Reisman D, Schultz J, Crawford K, Whittaker M, Algorithmic impact assessments report: a practical framework for public agency accountability (AI Now Institute, 9 April 2018).
Brooks W, Artificial bias: the ethical concerns of AI-driven dispute resolution in family matters. J Dispute Resolut 2022, 117.
Kannai R, Schild U, Zeleznikow J. Modeling the evolution of legal discretion an artificial intelligence approach. Ratio Juris. 2007;20(4):530.
Ashley KD, Artificial intelligence and legal analytics: new tools for law practice in the digital age (Cambridge University Press 2017).
Esmaeilzadeh H, Vaezi R. Conscious Empathic AI in Service. J Serv Res. 2022;25(4):549. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705221103531.
Emily S Taylor Poppe, 'The Future is Complicated: AI, Apps & Access to Justice' (2019) 72 Okla L Rev 185.
James Manyika et al, 'Jobs Lost, Jobs Gained: Workforce Transitions in a Time of Automation' (McKinsey Global Institute 2017) 150(1).
ROSS Intelligence, ROSS intelligence: legal research powered by artificial intelligence. 2023 https://www.rossintelligence.com/. Accessed 14 Mar 2024
DoNotPay. Save Time and Money with DoNotPay! https://donotpay.com/.
Pasquale F. A Rule of Persons, Not Machines: The Limits of Legal Automation. 2018. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/212819515.pdf.
Angwin J et al. Machine Bias (ProPublica) https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing. Accessed 20 Dec 2023
Budic M, AI and Us: ethical concerns, public knowledge and public attitudes on artificial intelligence. In: Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. 2022 https://doi.org/10.1145/3514094.3539518
Ashley KD. A brief history of the changing roles of case prediction in AI and law. Law Context A Socio-legal J. 2019. https://doi.org/10.26826/law-in-context.v36i1.88.
Rezaev AV, Tregubova ND. The possibility and necessity of the human-centered AI in legal theory and practice. J Dig Technol Law. 2023. https://doi.org/10.21202/jdtl.2023.24.
Rejmaniak R. Bias in artificial intelligence systems. Białostockie Studi Prawnicze. 2021;26(3):25. https://doi.org/10.15290/bsp.2021.26.03.02.
Kiseleva A, Kotzinos D, Hert PD. Transparency of AI in healthcare as a multilayered system of accountabilities: between legal requirements and technical limitations. Front Artif Intell. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.879603.
Gordon B. Automated facial recognition in law enforcement: the queen (On Application of Edward Bridges) v the chief constable of south wales police. Potchefstroom Electr Law J. 2021. https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2021/v24i0a8923.
Xiang A. Reconciling legal and technical approaches to algorithmic bias. Tenn L Rev. 2020;88:649.
Link JJ, et al. Lowering the risk of bias in AI applications. Artif Intell Soc Comput. 2023. https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe1003286.
Leavy S, O’Sullivan B, Siapera E, Data, Power and Bias in Artificial Intelligence 2020 arXiv:2008.07341https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.07341
Pontón-Núñez A. Automating judicial discretion: how algorithmic risk assessments in pretrial adjudications violate equal protection rights on the basis of race. Minnesota J Law Inequality. 2022. https://doi.org/10.24926/25730037.649.
Geslevich Packin N, Lev-Aretz Y, Learning algorithms and discrimination' in research handbook on the law of artificial intelligence (Edward Elgar Publishing 2018) 88. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439055.00014.
Liu X, Lorini E, Rotolo A, Sartor G. Modelling and explaining legal case-based reasoners through classifiers. Front Artif Intell Appl. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA220451.
Greenstein S. Preserving the rule of law in the era of artificial intelligence (AI). Artif Intell Law. 2021;30(3):291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-021-09294-4.
Belenguer L. AI bias: exploring discriminatory algorithmic decision-making models and the application of possible machine-centric solutions adapted from the pharmaceutical industry. AI Ethics. 2022;2:771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-022-00138-8.
Pessach D, Shmueli E. Improving fairness of artificial intelligence algorithms in privileged-group selection bias data settings. Expert Syst Appl. 2021;185:115667.
Varona D, Suárez JL. Discrimination, bias, fairness, and trustworthy AI. Appl Sci. 2022;12(12):5826. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12125826.
Morewedge CK, et al. Human bias in algorithm design. Nat Hum Behav. 2023;7:1822. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01724-4.
von Eschenbach WJ. Transparency and the black box problem: why we do not trust AI. Philos Technol. 2021;34:1607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00477-0.
Taori R, Tatsunori Hashimoto T. Data feedback loops: model-driven amplification of dataset biases. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (PMLR 2023).
O’Connor S, Liu H. Gender bias perpetuation and mitigation in AI technologies: challenges and opportunities. AI Soc. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01675-4.
Busuioc M. Accountable artificial intelligence: holding algorithms to account. Public Admin Rev. 2021;81(5):825.
Contini F. Artificial intelligence and the transformation of humans, law and technology interactions in judicial proceedings. Law Technol Hum. 2020;2:4.
Sir Robert Mark, Policing a Perplexed Society (1st edn, Routledge 2023). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003360520.
Nelson JAC, Cornerstones of Democracy. Judges' J 2023:62(2)
Yan Q. Legal challenges of artificial intelligence in the field of criminal defense. Lect Notes Educ Psychol Public Media. 2023;30(1):167. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/30/20231629.
Bureau of Justice Assistance, History of Risk Assessment | PSRAC https://bja.ojp.gov/program/psrac/basics/history-risk-assessment.
Zhang SX, Roberts RE, Farabee D. An analysis of prisoner reentry and parole risk using compas and traditional criminal history measures. Crime Delinq. 2014;60:16.
B Green, 'The False Promise of Risk Assessments: Epistemic Reform and the Limits of Fairness' in Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency’ (2020) [2018] SCC 30. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/bgreen/files/20-fat-risk.pdf.
Shah N, Bhagat N, Shah M. Crime forecasting: a machine learning and computer vision approach to crime prediction and prevention. Vis Comput Indus Biomed Art. 2021;4:9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42492-021-00075-z.
Harcourt BE. Risk as a proxy for race: the dangers of risk assessment. Fed Sentencing Report. 2015;27(4):237. https://doi.org/10.1525/fsr.2015.27.4.237.
Felzmann H, Fosch-Villaronga E, Lutz C, Tamò-Larrieux A. Transparency you can trust: transparency requirements for artificial intelligence between legal norms and contextual concerns. Big Data Soc. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951719860542.
Trimmings K. International family law in the age of digitalisation: the case of cross-border surrogacy and international parental child abduction, (EU and Comparative Law Issues and Challenges Series, 2023) https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/28256.
Lubit R. Recognizing and avoiding bias to improve child custody evaluations: convergent data are not sufficient for scientific assessment. J Fam Trauma Child Custody Child Dev. 2021;18(3):224. https://doi.org/10.1080/26904586.2021.1901635.
Glikson E, Woolley AW. Human trust in artificial intelligence: review of empirical research. Acad Manag Ann. 2020;14(2):627. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057.
Kortz M, et al. Is lawful AI ethical AI? Morals Mach. 2022;2(1):60. https://doi.org/10.5771/2747-5174-2022-1-60.
Kyriakou K, Otterbacher J. In humans we trust. Discov Artif Intell. 2023;3:44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-023-00092-2.
Gingras D, Morrison J. Artificial Intelligence and Family ODR. Family Court Rev. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12569.
Rajendra JB, Thuraisingam AS. The deployment of artificial intelligence in alternative dispute resolution: the AI augmented arbitrator. Inf Commun Technol Law. 2022;31(2):176. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2021.1998955.
Rúa MMB, Muñoz SÁ, Aristizábal JAG, Tapiero JIM. Online dispute resolution, alternative conflict resolution mechanisms and artificial intelligence for decongestion in the administration of justice. Rev Direito Estado Telecomun. 2020;12(1):77. https://doi.org/10.26512/lstr.v12i1.25808.
Enqvist L. Human oversight’ in the EU artificial intelligence act: what, when and by whom? Law Innov Technol. 2023;15(2):508. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2245683.