1. bookAHEAD OF PRINT
Detalles de la revista
License
Formato
Revista
eISSN
2444-8656
Primera edición
01 Jan 2016
Calendario de la edición
2 veces al año
Idiomas
Inglés
Acceso abierto

Research on the experimental principle of deep integration of LETS software and criminal procedure under the background of artificial intelligence

Publicado en línea: 30 Nov 2022
Volumen & Edición: AHEAD OF PRINT
Páginas: -
Recibido: 30 Jun 2022
Aceptado: 16 Sep 2022
Detalles de la revista
License
Formato
Revista
eISSN
2444-8656
Primera edición
01 Jan 2016
Calendario de la edición
2 veces al año
Idiomas
Inglés
Introduction

With the development of human information technology and the increasing speed of network information exchange, the information data generated by human society keeps expanding. Big data with multiple features emerge as required by the needs of the times [1, 2, 3, 4]. Artificial intelligence is a technical science that studies the theories, methods, technologies and application systems used to simulate and expand human intelligence [5]. The realisation of artificial intelligence (AI) must be supported by massive data; otherwise, there will be no data source for machine learning [6]. As a social science, the law is increasingly connected with modern science and technology such as big data and AI in terms of research objects [7].

Artificial intelligence and big data technology have had a profound impact on the whole process of criminal litigation both in terms of technology and value [8]. Technological progress cannot deny the dominant position of human beings. At least in the era of weak AI, it is not feasible to replace human beings with machines [9]. The original intention of research and invention of big data and AI is to rely on technology to liberate human labour and replace human beings in simple and repetitive work [10]. Artificial intelligence intervention in criminal litigation can effectively help improve the efficiency of litigation and reduce the pressure of fewer cases.

The traditional legal training link has many shortcomings [11, 12, 13, 14]. For example, legal documents have a wide range of types and are difficult to be systematically grasped. The simulated trial performance is too much and the simulation degree is insufficient. The cases that students encounter in practice base have randomness and repetition. In order to make up for the shortcomings of these real-life training links, law schools in many colleges and universities now use Legal Experimental Teaching System (LETS) [15, 16, 17, 18].

Relying on the experimental teaching platform developed by Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, LETS aims at cultivating legal personnel's professional quality and practicing ability. It explores the informatisation, integration and intelligence of legal experiment teaching, and the use of computer simulation technology [19, 20]. The content covers legislation, law enforcement, litigation and non-litigation. It is used to build a comprehensive system incorporating the legal experiment teaching software platform. Supported by the powerful background of AI and computer application technology, LETS fully simulates a variety of legal work experiment scenarios. The experimenters play different roles in the legal business in the simulation and interact with each other on a networked work interface. The combination of professional knowledge and practical problems improves the practical ability and fills the gap between theory and practice in the process of legal education and training.

Artificial intelligence was introduced to alleviate the unbearable weight of traditional legal experiment teaching [21]. In the process of teaching experiments in law, it is necessary to make full use of modern information technology methods to carry out teaching reforms [22]. It is also necessary to expand the time and space of legal experimental training, optimise the process of legal experimental training and enrich the resources of legal experimental training. The forms of legal experimental training are more flexible and diverse. The LETS in the context of AI solves the problem of separation between theoretical teaching and practice in legal education [23]. The characteristics of the LETS system also show that its effectiveness needs to be fully utilised to enable the full realisation of its potential. The system integrity of LETS fosters presupposed thinking among law students [24]. LETS's open space-time and project autonomy foster generative thinking among law students. LETS's storage stability, retrieval convenience, comparison intuitiveness and variable simplicity can cultivate the experimental thinking of natural science students in the natural science style of law students [25]. LETS also enables the discovery of real social relations in the combination of elements, and optimises the path of real social relations.

Drawing from the above considerations, this paper proposes a framework based on the deep integration of LETS software and criminal litigation in the context of AI. The main innovations are as follows:

First of all, the process and specific system composition of LETS software in law teaching are introduced in detail.

Then, the new opportunities and development prospects arising from the combination of criminal proceedings in the context of AI are introduced.

At the same time, a set of deep integration frameworks based on LETS software and criminal litigation under the background of AI is designed. It is also applied to a university law school for experiments, and at the same time uses different AI deep learning to personalise and recommend criminal procedure learning courses.

Finally, personalised recommendations are compared with traditional LETS systems and different deep learning models. Experiments show that LETS software can push personalised criminal procedure learning courses more matched by using algorithms in the AI environment.

The LETS software

The scale of legal education has expanded rapidly in recent years, and it has shown the characteristics of a multi-level and multi-channel approach. Traditional methods of social science experimentation are less realistic. In order to solve this problem, the scientific research team led by Zhongnan University of Economics and Law proposed the concept of using modern information technology to build a holographic simulation experiment of legal science. In 2010, they successfully developed the LETS. At present, dozens of law schools and departments across the country have signed agreements with Zhongnan University of Economics and Law to introduce the LETS system to carry out experimental teaching of law. It is also necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the experimental teaching mode provided by the LETS informatisation system.

With the direct goal of cultivating the professionalism and ability of legal professionals, let us base our training on the principles of the interactive and participatory experience teaching method. Using legal business simulation technology, a series of legal experiment modules have been developed, covering five aspects: legislation, law enforcement, litigation, non-litigation business and legal thinking training. It has a highly integrated organisational feature for users, experimental projects, experimental classrooms, experimental tasks, experimental reports and experimental results. Administrators, teachers and students can use the system to easily develop and organise a variety of legal experiments.

LETE consists of five subsystems: the public administration subsystem, the legislative experiment subsystem, the law enforcement experiment subsystem, the litigation experiment subsystem and the non-litigation experimental subsystem. Each system consists of several functional modules, the specific structure of which is illustrated in Figure 1.

According to the framework provided by the system, a large number of experimental teaching projects in law can be freely created.

You can quickly create teacher users and student users, and register for each experimental teaching classroom.

Students conduct simulation experiments on legislation, law enforcement, litigation and non-litigation in small groups under the guidance of teachers or independently.

Teachers can easily evaluate experiments and manage experiment results.

Automatic generation of a series of statistical reports can be programmed, and these reports would allow system administrators to gauge the effectiveness of the experimental teaching mode provided by the LETS informatisation system.

Fig. 1

LETS software. LETS, Legal experiment teaching system

Criminal prosecution in the context of AI

Jurisprudence is a discipline that attaches equal importance to theory and practice, and it not only pursues fairness and justice as the supreme good, but also takes it as its mission to resolve major or trivial disputes in reality. On the one hand, legal education should pay full attention to the transmission of legal theoretical knowledge, and on the other hand, efforts should be made to cultivate the legal practice skills of law students. The fusion of legal theory and legal skills is not an easy task. As a law student who has not yet directly experienced the complicated social life, it is important to examine how we can identify and evaluate these legal provisions and legal doctrines in order to successfully establish our legal position and legal thinking. Legal education always assists students in ‘generating’ legal thinking and the concept of fairness and justice through various practical training sessions (legal document writing, moot court trial, clinic-style case study, professional internship, social investigation of legal issues, etc.).

Since AI is used in criminal proceedings, the advantage of evidence collection is that it is highly consistent with the requirements of ‘credible and sufficient evidence’ for evidence collection and acceptance. AI-powered judicial cases are handled based on a huge database and with specific algorithms. It has the characteristics of high-speed processing of information, grasping key vocabulary and integration of data resources. Combining it with criminal proceedings, first of all, can effectively solve the problems of high-tech crimes that are difficult to detect and for which it is difficult to collect evidence. Then, we can alleviate the shortcomings of ‘fewer cases’ in criminal cases in China. At the same time, it can effectively alleviate the pressure on the people's courts to handle cases under the reform of the personnel ratio system for judges. It mainly includes the following aspects:

Smart courts improve judicial efficiency. Big data pushes similar cases and laws and regulations through the analysis of case input information. The time for legal search has been shortened, the efficiency of case handling has been improved and the trial results of similar cases that are very different have been reduced as much as possible.

Innovative investigative methods for smart policing. New forms of crime, such as Internet fraud, theft and trafficking of personal privacy information, are emerging one after another. The use of AI to improve detection methods also requires constant updating and creation.

Wisdom in case handling narrows the difference in case handling. The new trial support mechanism of judicial reform requires the judge undertaking the case to conduct a search on the China judgement documents network, trial case database and so forth, and is responsible for the authenticity and accuracy of the search results. Artificial intelligence technology can effectively reduce the judge's wilful use of legal provisions, and arbitrary adjudication, and ultimately lead to the embarrassing situation of different judgements in the same case.

Based on the framework of deep integration of LETS software and criminal litigation under the background of AI

Based on the AI background, the deep integration framework of LETS software and criminal litigation is a comprehensive simulation system, as shown in Figure 2. The framework includes several parts, such as the legislative experimental system, the law enforcement experimental system, the litigation experimental system, the non-litigation experimental system and the public management system. Finally, the deep learning of AI will be used to predict the results and in the experimental analysis. Criminal procedure experiment in the context of AI is one of the components of the litigation experiment system, and its specific operation process is as follows:

Group classes and create tasks. After the system administrator gives the classroom teacher permission, law teachers can import the class list into the system, and after importing, they can group students. The students can be grouped according to the number of roles in the criminal proceedings. In the event of a mismatch or a disaggregated role assignment, multiple non-conflicting roles can be held by the same classmate, such as witnesses and victims, expert evaluators and clerks. Once grouped, you can create the appropriate task, that is, select the experimental case. At present, the number of cases in the system is pre-implanted, and thus the number is still relatively limited, with only 14 criminal cases. Teachers can select appropriate cases based on the progress of the theoretical course teaching, and create the same or different case tasks for each student experimental group.

Let students enter the experimental system and understand the basic situation of the case. Subsequently, let them read the system's given materials to understand the case handling process and to ensure that the specific content and requirements of the experiment are clearly registered in their comprehension. The LETS system provides some materials in advance for each case, such as basic facts, interrogation records, litigation documents, etc. Students serve as reference samples; otherwise, they lose the significance of the experiment. To be capable of working with these materials, students are required to be familiar with them in advance. However, in the specific experimental process, the case process should be handled according to the changes in the situation.

Students follow the procedure for experiments. The experimental cases in the system are designed as a step-by-step process according to the complete process of criminal proceedings, and there is a process guidance diagram. Students are assigned roles in sequence. The responsible person of the public security organ approves the filing of the case, and after filing the case, the investigation is selected for investigation based on the circumstances of the case. Criminal suspects are interrogated, witnesses and victims are questioned, etc. These investigations are conducted online. At each stage, the case processing will form some materials, which are the basis for judging the results of the experiment. Legal documents are filled in by students in the given format and in combination with the facts of the case. In the aspects of questioning, interrogation, court investigation, debate, etc., students are encouraged to expand the content according to the specific circumstances of the case to make the experimental situation more realistic.

Teachers judge the results of the experiment. After students complete the lab process, teachers can log in to view the progress of each lab group and the materials students have completed at each stage. The results of the experiment are comprehensively evaluated, that is, the completion of the entire experiment and its related data are scored. Each student's performance in the group experiment is then scored. However, this is because the experiments are conducted in groups, and each group of students has a different division of litigation roles. Teachers have difficulty grasping the specific performance of each student and may only be able to judge their performance based on the material they have completed in the system.

Fig. 2

Framework of deep integration of LETS software and criminal litigation based on. AI, artificial intelligence; LETS, legal experimental teaching system

Experimental results and analysis
Experimental data

In this paper, the experimental data of a university law school are selected from the semesters 2021.9 to 2022.6. Students and faculty use the LETS system to study the criminal procedure course. First, teachers select courses for students. Students study according to the course selected by the teacher, and collect a questionnaire of after-class learning feedback after learning. Artificial intelligence conducts data analysis to make algorithm recommendations, recommending students to master and learn the corresponding criminal procedure courses. Finally, based on the results obtained at the end of the semester, the student's satisfaction with the course and the accuracy of the criminal procedure course based on the personalised study recommended by LETS are analysed.

Experimental environment

The present study experiments with a LETS system and a computer with Linux, Python 3.6.1, TensorFlow 2.0, 32 GB of memory and GTX 1080Ti graphics card in the experimental software platform. The specific parameters are shown in Table 1.

Hyperparameters setting

ParametersValueExplanation

Nx6Attention layer number
Heads8Number of multi-layer heads
Batch size32Batch processing steps
Hidden512Hidden layer
Dropout0.1Prevent overfitting
Learning rate1 × 1−4Learning rate
Experimental evaluation criteria

Since model parameter settings have a great impact on the accuracy and robustness of the model, this paper obtains better continuous model training and updated model parameters, personalised recommendation accuracy (P), recall rate® and F1 value as evaluation indicators.

Experimental analysis

In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed method, not only the traditional LETS system but also the traditional neural network is discussed. Five sets of comparative experiments were set up. The inputs are all weight-matching vectors. To verify the effect of feature extraction and the impact on the model during vector processing, the experimental results were recoded, and are shown in Table 2.

Experimental results

ModelsP/%R/%F1/%

LETS87.9388.2387.31
LETS + LSTM89.1590.6189.24
LETS + BiLSTM92.1992.5691.79
LETS + CRF95.2094.0893.52
LETS + LSTM + CRF95.1293.3292.29
LETS + Transformer94.2492.3493.24
LETS + Transformer + CRF97.8997.4696.85

LETS, legal experimental teaching system

After several rounds of experiments and cross-verification of experimental results, the evaluation results of various baseline models and fusion models are derived, and these are shown in Table 2, while the model execution time is shown in Table 3. In order to further visually demonstrate the superiority of the proposed framework, the training process of each model is analysed, and the accuracy change process of the set is verified for the training process of each model.

Training time (/s)

ModelTraining time

LETS1089
LETS + LSTM1834
LETS + BiLSTM1227
LETS + CRF652
LETS + LSTM + CRF451
LETS + Transformer320
LETS + Transformer + CRF289

LETS, legal experimental teaching system

The experimental results of Table 3 show that the LETS software framework proposed in this paper has achieved the best results in personalised criminal procedure learning, with an accuracy rate of 97.89%. Compared with other models, the overall effect is increased by 4%–5%, which demonstrates the superiority of the model used in this paper. Experiments also prove that the accuracy rate of various deep learning models and LETS systems in the training process changes trends due to the characteristics of the data. Concerning the suitability of various models for the application of LETS software to enable students to learn criminal procedures, it is ascertained that the Transformer + CRF model demonstrates greater suitability. The LSTM and BiLSTM models as baselines have a turbulent trend as a whole before converging. The accuracy of the verification set of this model is the most excellent, reaching the convergence state after 289s, and the accuracy convergence rate is 97.89%, which is significantly higher than those of the other models in the comparative experiment, thus further verifying the effectiveness and robustness of the model proposed in this paper.

Conclusion

The present research studies the experimental principle of deep integration of LETS software and criminal procedure under the background of AI, and has as its chief aim the cross-convergence of AI and LETS software with criminal prosecution. The LETS software is used to form a personalised criminal procedure learning system for college law students. Personalised recommendations are made through AI algorithm learning, forming a big data platform, and providing an important basis for learning-related criminal procedure laws. Based on the above problems, this paper proposes a framework for the deep integration of LETS software and criminal litigation under the background of AI. First, the paper introduces the situation currently prevailing concerning the development of criminal proceedings in the context of AI. Then, a deep integration framework based on LETS software and criminal litigation in the context of AI is designed. At the same time, the framework is used to facilitate the LETS system to intelligently learn criminal proceedings. Experimental results show that LETS software can push personalised criminal procedure learning courses more matched by using algorithms in an AI environment. There are also some problems with the experiments conducted as part of this study, and they are as follows:

Algorithmic bias leads to judicial injustice. The application of AI is based on algorithms. An algorithm is an inexhaustible set of rules. An algorithm specifies a series of operations to solve a particular type of problem and is an accurate and complete description of the method of solving the problem. Capture of shallow information is mainly carried out by large databases. Pre-designed algorithms are inherently hysterical. Subjective discrimination by people leads to algorithmic bias.

The algorithmic system may cause the program to end. Putting sufficiently objective proof criteria into AI is a reasonable and legal operation of input algorithm rules, but its inherent drawbacks are also huge and obvious.

In future work, the systematic research proposed in this paper will be improved in relation to the aspects of increasing the transparency of AI technology, determining the scope of work of AI justice and establishing the working principles of AI justice.

Fig. 1

LETS software. LETS, Legal experiment teaching system
LETS software. LETS, Legal experiment teaching system

Fig. 2

Framework of deep integration of LETS software and criminal litigation based on. AI, artificial intelligence; LETS, legal experimental teaching system
Framework of deep integration of LETS software and criminal litigation based on. AI, artificial intelligence; LETS, legal experimental teaching system

Hyperparameters setting

Parameters Value Explanation

Nx 6 Attention layer number
Heads 8 Number of multi-layer heads
Batch size 32 Batch processing steps
Hidden 512 Hidden layer
Dropout 0.1 Prevent overfitting
Learning rate 1 × 1−4 Learning rate

Training time (/s)

Model Training time

LETS 1089
LETS + LSTM 1834
LETS + BiLSTM 1227
LETS + CRF 652
LETS + LSTM + CRF 451
LETS + Transformer 320
LETS + Transformer + CRF 289

Experimental results

Models P/% R/% F1/%

LETS 87.93 88.23 87.31
LETS + LSTM 89.15 90.61 89.24
LETS + BiLSTM 92.19 92.56 91.79
LETS + CRF 95.20 94.08 93.52
LETS + LSTM + CRF 95.12 93.32 92.29
LETS + Transformer 94.24 92.34 93.24
LETS + Transformer + CRF 97.89 97.46 96.85

Petit N. Law and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence and Robots – Conceptual Framework and Normative Implications[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2017. PetitN Law and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence and Robots – Conceptual Framework and Normative Implications[J] Social Science Electronic Publishing 2017 10.2139/ssrn.2931339 Search in Google Scholar

Reed C, Walton D, Macagno F. Argument diagramming in logic, law and artificial intelligence[J]. Knowledge Engineering Review, 2007, 22(1):87–109. ReedC WaltonD MacagnoF Argument diagramming in logic, law and artificial intelligence[J] Knowledge Engineering Review 2007 22 1 87 109 10.1017/S0269888907001051 Search in Google Scholar

Macagno F, Reed C, Walton D. Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intelligence, and Law[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2011. MacagnoF ReedC WaltonD Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intelligence, and Law[J] Social Science Electronic Publishing 2011 Search in Google Scholar

Pagallo U. LegalAIze: Tackling the Normative Challenges of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Through the Secondary Rules of Law[J]. 2017. PagalloU LegalAIze: Tackling the Normative Challenges of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Through the Secondary Rules of Law[J] 2017 10.1007/978-981-10-5038-1_11 Search in Google Scholar

Uralov M S. Prospects for the use of artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings[C]//AICTE Sponsored International E-Conference. 2021. UralovM S Prospects for the use of artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings[C] AICTE Sponsored International E-Conference 2021 Search in Google Scholar

Shi X, Yang Y U, School L, et al. The Combination and Continuation of Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Proceedings[J]. China Development, 2019. ShiX YangY U SchoolL The Combination and Continuation of Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Proceedings[J] China Development 2019 Search in Google Scholar

Office L H. Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings Guidance for vulnerable or intimated witnesses, including children; appendices. 2002. OfficeL H Achieving best evidence in criminal proceedings Guidance for vulnerable or intimated witnesses, including children; appendices 2002 Search in Google Scholar

Schmeling A, Olze A, Reisinger W, et al. Forensic age diagnostics of living people undergoing criminal proceedings[J]. Forensic Science International, 2004, 144(2–3):243–245. SchmelingA OlzeA ReisingerW Forensic age diagnostics of living people undergoing criminal proceedings[J] Forensic Science International 2004 144 2–3 243 245 10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.04.05915364396 Search in Google Scholar

Zhang Y, Qian T, Tang W. Buildings-to-distribution-network integration considering power transformer loading capability and distribution network reconfiguration[J]. Energy, 2022, 244. ZhangY QianT TangW Buildings-to-distribution-network integration considering power transformer loading capability and distribution network reconfiguration[J] Energy 2022 244 10.1016/j.energy.2022.123104 Search in Google Scholar

T. Qian, Xingyu Chen, Yanli Xin, W. H. Tang, Lixiao Wang. Resilient Decentralized Optimization of Chance Constrained Electricity-gas Systems over Lossy Communication Networks [J]. Energy, 2022, 239, 122158. QianT. ChenXingyu XinYanli TangW. H. WangLixiao Resilient Decentralized Optimization of Chance Constrained Electricity-gas Systems over Lossy Communication Networks [J] Energy 2022 239 122158 10.1016/j.energy.2021.122158 Search in Google Scholar

Song Z W. An Analysis in Jurisprudence of the Subjects of Criminal Procedure – Based on the Criminal Legal Relationship[J]. Journal of Yantai University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), 2002. SongZ W An Analysis in Jurisprudence of the Subjects of Criminal Procedure – Based on the Criminal Legal Relationship[J] Journal of Yantai University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition) 2002 Search in Google Scholar

Jacobi T, Berlin R. Supreme Irrelevance: The Court's Abdication in Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing. JacobiT BerlinR Supreme Irrelevance: The Court's Abdication in Criminal Procedure Jurisprudence[J] Social Science Electronic Publishing Search in Google Scholar

Mhum Y. Penal mediation as an alternative resolution in the indonesian criminal justice system (a dignified justice jurisprudence)[J]. International Journal of Advanced Research, 2020, 8(10):12–21. MhumY Penal mediation as an alternative resolution in the indonesian criminal justice system (a dignified justice jurisprudence)[J] International Journal of Advanced Research 2020 8 10 12 21 10.21474/IJAR01/11817 Search in Google Scholar

T. Qian, Y. Liu, W. H Zhang, W. H. Tang, M. Shahidehpour. Event-Triggered Updating Method in Centralized and Distributed Secondary Controls for Islanded Microgrid Restoration[J]. IEEE Transactions on Smart Gird, 2020, 11(2): 1387–1395. QianT. LiuY. ZhangW. H TangW. H. ShahidehpourM. Event-Triggered Updating Method in Centralized and Distributed Secondary Controls for Islanded Microgrid Restoration[J] IEEE Transactions on Smart Gird 2020 11 2 1387 1395 10.1109/TSG.2019.2937366 Search in Google Scholar

CH Fang, YN Tao, JG Eang, et al. Mapping Relation of Leakage Currents of Polluted Insulators and Discharge Arc Area[J]. Frontiers in Energy Research, 2021. FangCH TaoYN EangJG Mapping Relation of Leakage Currents of Polluted Insulators and Discharge Arc Area[J] Frontiers in Energy Research 2021 10.3389/fenrg.2021.777230 Search in Google Scholar

Liu M. Legal Experimental Teaching System – A LETS Software-based Teaching Research[J]. Legal Education Research, 2015. LiuM Legal Experimental Teaching System – A LETS Software-based Teaching Research[J] Legal Education Research 2015 Search in Google Scholar

Xian-Yuan G E, School L. The Utilization of Legal Experimental Teaching System[J]. Journal of Nanchang Normal University, 2014. Xian-YuanG E SchoolL The Utilization of Legal Experimental Teaching System[J] Journal of Nanchang Normal University 2014 Search in Google Scholar

Yu T, Nai P, Zeng X H, et al. Research on the Construction of Teaching System for Applied Ethnic Legal Talents Integrating Modern Educational Technology[J]. Advances in Science and Technology, 2021, 105:364–376. YuT NaiP ZengX H Research on the Construction of Teaching System for Applied Ethnic Legal Talents Integrating Modern Educational Technology[J] Advances in Science and Technology 2021 105 364 376 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AST.105.364 Search in Google Scholar

Khan A R, Xu J, Varsanyi P, et al. Deep Interpretable Criminal Charge Prediction and Algorithmic Bias[J]. 2021. KhanA R XuJ VarsanyiP Deep Interpretable Criminal Charge Prediction and Algorithmic Bias[J] 2021 Search in Google Scholar

Barone P M, RMD Maggio, Ferrara C. Not necessarily buried bodies: Forensic GPR investigations from criminal to civil justice[C]//International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar. IEEE, 2015. BaroneP M MaggioRMD FerraraC Not necessarily buried bodies: Forensic GPR investigations from criminal to civil justice[C] International Workshop on Advanced Ground Penetrating Radar. IEEE 2015 10.1109/IWAGPR.2015.7292681 Search in Google Scholar

Oprea E E. The reflection of procedural guilt in the criminal procedure provisions. Liability for unjust condemnation or for taking preventive measures unlawfully[J]. Challenges of the Knowledge Society, 2013, 3(–). OpreaE E The reflection of procedural guilt in the criminal procedure provisions. Liability for unjust condemnation or for taking preventive measures unlawfully[J] Challenges of the Knowledge Society 2013 3 (–). Search in Google Scholar

Zhang N, Jing-Cun X U, Library, et al. Computational Jurisprudence: Interdisciplinary Study on Artificial Intelligence and Law[J]. Modern Law Science, 2019. ZhangN Jing-CunX U Library, et al. Computational Jurisprudence: Interdisciplinary Study on Artificial Intelligence and Law[J] Modern Law Science 2019 Search in Google Scholar

Chatzipanagiotis M. Whose fault is it? Artificial Intelligence and Liability in International Space Law[C]//71st International Astronautical Congress (IAC) – The CyberSpace Edition, 12–14 October 2020. 2020. ChatzipanagiotisM Whose fault is it? Artificial Intelligence and Liability in International Space Law[C] 71st International Astronautical Congress (IAC) – The CyberSpace Edition 12–14 October 2020 2020 Search in Google Scholar

Markovi M, Gostoji S, Indjic D. Artificial Intelligence and Law: Review of Task Automation Techniques and Tools. 2021. MarkoviM GostojiS IndjicD Artificial Intelligence and Law: Review of Task Automation Techniques and Tools 2021 Search in Google Scholar

Daria K, Maximilian A, Wai K M, et al. Clarifying Assumptions About Artificial Intelligence Before Revolutionising Patent Law[J]. GRUR International, 2022(4):4. DariaK MaximilianA WaiK M Clarifying Assumptions About Artificial Intelligence Before Revolutionising Patent Law[J] GRUR International 2022 4 4 Search in Google Scholar

Artículos recomendados de Trend MD

Planifique su conferencia remota con Sciendo