About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

28 A.I. & L. 1 (2020)

handle is hein.journals/artinl28 and id is 1 raw text is: Artificial Intelligence and Law (2020) 28:1-5 https:I/doi.org/l 0.1007/s10506-019-09253-0 Evidence & decision making in the law: theoretical, computational and empirical approaches Marcello Di Bello' Bart Verheij2 Published online: 22 June 2019 © Springer Nature B.V. 2019 Decisions of judges, court experts and lay jurors play an important role in the fab- ric of society. Since the price of decisional errors in civil or criminal cases can be significant, it is paramount to employ good methods for assessing the evidence on which decisions are based. This special issue addresses questions at the intersec- tion of evidence assessment in court and legal decision-making. The special issue contains the postproceedings of the workshop 'Evidence & Decision Making in the Law: Theoretical, Computational and Empirical Approaches' that was held in conjunction with the 16th International Conference on Al and Law and took place on June 16th, 2017 at King's College London (https://icail20l7evidencedecision .wordpress.com).1 The workshop aimed to foster an interdisciplinary debate among researchers in Al & Law working on legal reasoning and argumentation theory, legal scholars, philosophers and empirically minded researchers. For some general refer- ences on the themes discussed during the workshop, we refer the reader to the list at the end of this introduction. Below we provide a summary of the contributions in the special issue. The paper 'Normative decision analysis in forensic science' by Alex Biedermann, Silvia Bozza and Franco Taroni shows how statistical decision theory can be fruit- fully applied-as an analytical and a normative tool-to the decision problem that forensic experts routinely face. For example, when a forensic expert has compared two fingerprints-one print associated with the crime sample and the other associ- ated with the suspect-the expert should decide whether the prints come from the same source or from different sources. The expert may decide to say that the prints The workshop was a successor of two earlier events, the symposium 'Trial With and Without Math- ematics', which took place at Stanford Law School on May 30th, 2014 (https://law.stanford.edu/event/ trial-with-and-without-mathematics-legal-philosophical-and-computational-perspectives), and the ICAIL 2015 workshop 'Studying Evidence in the Law', which took place at University of San Diego on June 12th, 2015 (https://icail20l5evidence.wordpress.com). E Marcello Di Bello marcello.dibello@lehman.cuny.edu Department of Philosophy, Lehman College, City University of New York, New York, USA 2 Bernoulli Institute for Mathematics, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands I_) Springer

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most