• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Machine learning in bail decisions and judges' trustworthiness.保释决定中的机器学习与法官的可信度。
AI Soc. 2023 Apr 21:1-12. doi: 10.1007/s00146-023-01673-6.
2
From discretion to disagreement: explaining disparities in judges' pretrial decisions.从自由裁量到分歧:解释法官审前裁决中的差异
Behav Sci Law. 2005;23(3):367-86. doi: 10.1002/bsl.619.
3
Beyond bias and discrimination: redefining the AI ethics principle of fairness in healthcare machine-learning algorithms.超越偏见与歧视:重新定义医疗保健机器学习算法中公平性的人工智能伦理原则。
AI Soc. 2023;38(2):549-563. doi: 10.1007/s00146-022-01455-6. Epub 2022 May 21.
4
Inequality threat increases laypeople's, but not judges', acceptance of algorithmic decision making in court.不平等威胁增加了外行对法庭上算法决策的接受度,但法官并非如此。
Law Hum Behav. 2024 Oct-Dec;48(5-6):441-455. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000577. Epub 2024 Sep 12.
5
Can criminal justice be predicted? Using regression analysis to predict judges' decisions on petitions for new criminal trials.刑事司法能否预测?利用回归分析预测法官对新刑事审判请求的裁决。
Sci Justice. 2024 Jan;64(1):43-49. doi: 10.1016/j.scijus.2023.12.001. Epub 2023 Dec 3.
6
Explicit and implicit markers of fairness preeminence in criminal judges.刑事法官公平卓越的明确和隐含标志。
Sci Rep. 2021 Sep 2;11(1):17599. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-96962-9.
7
A Multi-disciplinary and Comparative Approach to Evaluating Pre-trial Detention Decisions: Towards Evidence-Based Reform.一种评估审前拘留决定的多学科比较方法:迈向基于证据的改革。
Eur J Crim Pol Res. 2022;28(3):381-395. doi: 10.1007/s10610-022-09510-0. Epub 2022 May 13.
8
Impact of risk assessment on judges' fairness in sentencing relatively poor defendants.风险评估对法官量刑相对贫困被告公正性的影响。
Law Hum Behav. 2020 Feb;44(1):51-59. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000360. Epub 2020 Jan 13.
9
Appearance-based trust processing in schizophrenia.基于外貌的信任处理在精神分裂症中的研究。
Br J Clin Psychol. 2020 Jun;59(2):139-153. doi: 10.1111/bjc.12234. Epub 2019 Sep 6.
10
"I don't think people are ready to trust these algorithms at face value": trust and the use of machine learning algorithms in the diagnosis of rare disease.“我认为人们还没有准备好完全信任这些算法”:信任和机器学习算法在罕见病诊断中的应用。
BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Nov 16;23(1):112. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00842-4.

引用本文的文献

1
Revolutionizing diagnosis of pulmonary based on CT: a systematic review of imaging analysis through deep learning.基于CT的肺部诊断革命:深度学习影像分析的系统综述
Front Microbiol. 2025 Jan 8;15:1510026. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1510026. eCollection 2024.

保释决定中的机器学习与法官的可信度。

Machine learning in bail decisions and judges' trustworthiness.

作者信息

Morin-Martel Alexis

机构信息

Philosophy, McGill University, Montreal, QC Canada.

出版信息

AI Soc. 2023 Apr 21:1-12. doi: 10.1007/s00146-023-01673-6.

DOI:10.1007/s00146-023-01673-6
PMID:37358945
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10120473/
Abstract

The use of AI algorithms in criminal trials has been the subject of very lively ethical and legal debates recently. While there are concerns over the lack of accuracy and the harmful biases that certain algorithms display, new algorithms seem more promising and might lead to more accurate legal decisions. Algorithms seem especially relevant for bail decisions, because such decisions involve statistical data to which human reasoners struggle to give adequate weight. While getting the right legal outcome is a strong desideratum of criminal trials, advocates of the relational theory of procedural justice give us good reason to think that fairness and perceived fairness of legal procedures have a value that is independent from the outcome. According to this literature, one key aspect of fairness is trustworthiness. In this paper, I argue that using certain algorithms to assist bail decisions could increase three different aspects of judges' trustworthiness: (1) actual trustworthiness, (2) rich trustworthiness, and (3) perceived trustworthiness.

摘要

最近,人工智能算法在刑事审判中的应用一直是非常活跃的伦理和法律辩论的主题。虽然人们担心某些算法缺乏准确性以及存在有害偏见,但新算法似乎更有前景,可能会带来更准确的法律裁决。算法似乎在保释决定方面特别相关,因为此类决定涉及统计数据,人类推理者很难对其给予足够的重视。虽然获得正确的法律结果是刑事审判的一个强烈愿望,但程序正义关系理论的支持者给了我们充分的理由去思考,法律程序的公平性和感知到的公平性具有独立于结果的价值。根据这一文献,公平的一个关键方面是可信赖性。在本文中,我认为使用某些算法协助保释决定可以提高法官可信赖性的三个不同方面:(1)实际可信赖性,(2)丰富可信赖性,以及(3)感知可信赖性。