SUD HOKIMIYATI ORGANLARIDA SUN’IY INTELLEKTNING QO‘LLANILISHI: NAZARIYA VA AMALIYOT
Kalit so‘zlar:
sunʼiy intellekt, bashorat-oldindan taxmin qilish, axloqiy tamoyillar, inson huquqlari hurmat qilinishi tamoyili, teng munosabatda bo‘lish tamoyili, maʼlumotlar xavfsizligini taʼminlash, sud hokimiyati organlari, raqamlashtirish, sunʼiy intellektni nazorat qilish, katta hajmdagi maʼlumotlar (big data)Annotatsiya
Mazkur maqolada muallif tomonidan sudlarda sunʼiy intellektning asosiy vazifalari: maʼlumotlarni tashkil etish, maslahat berish, bashorat-oldindan taxmin qilish kabi funksiyalari tahlil etilgan. Bundan tashqari, ushbu maqolada sud amaliyotida SIning qo‘llanilishi tamoyillari: axloqiy, inson huquqlari hurmat qilinishi, teng munosabatda bo‘lish, maʼlumotlar xavfsizligini taʼminlash, shaffoflik, sunʼiy intellektning foydalanuvchilar nazorati ostida bo‘lishi tamoyillari ilmiy nuqtai nazardan ko‘rib chiqilgan. Shu bilan birga, muallif o‘z maqolasida sunʼiy intellektdan sud hokimiyati organlarida samarali foydalanish kabi masalalarni atroflicha o‘rgangan. Muallif o‘z xulosasida sunʼiy intellektni sudda qo‘llashni yanada takomillashtirish bo‘yicha takliflarni ilgari surgan. Sud amaliyotining bir xilligi va sud hujjatlarining ochiqligi taʼminlanadi. Fuqarolar uchun sunʼiy intellekt АT sohasidagi eng so‘nggi yutuqlardan foydalangan holda, sud ishlarini ko‘rib chiqish natijalarini topish va baholash uchun sifatli vositaga aylanadi. Bu daʼvogarga sudga daʼvo qilingan arizaning muvaffaqiyatli bo‘lish ehtimolini taxmin qilish va shu asosda ishni sudga bermasdan qaror qabul qilish imkonini beradi.
Iqtiboslar
1. McCarthy J. et al. A Proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, 1955, August 31. Ed. J. Kaplan. Artificial Intelligence: What Everyone Needs to Know, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016.
2. Julia L. L’intelligence artificielle n’existe pas (AI does not exist). First Edition, Paris, 2019, p. 123.
3. Kahnemann D. Thinking, fast and slow. London, Penguin, 2011, p. 43.
4. British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal, 2019. The Civil Resolution Tribunal. Available at: https://civilresolutionbc.ca/.
5. Van der Put M. Kan artificiële intelligentie de rechtspraak betoveren (Can AI bewitch the courts)? Rechtstreeks, 2019, February, pp. 50-60.
6. Aletras N., Tsarapatsanis D., Preoţiuc-Pietro D., Lampos V. Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: a Natural Language Processing perspective. PeerJ Computer Science, 2016, 2:e93. DOI: 10.7717/peerj-cs.93/.
7. Prakken H. Komt de robotrechter eraan (Is the robot judge arriving?)? Nederlands Juristenblad, 2018, April, no. 207.
8. Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research World Prison Brief. Available at: www.prisonstudies.org/ (accessed 06.12.2019).
9. Angwin J. Machine Bias. ProPublica, 2016, May 23.
10. European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial systems and their environment. Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 2019.
11. Council of State advice of September 6 2018, Staatscourant. Official Gazette, 2018, 50999.
12. Contini F., Lanzara G.F. The elusive mediation between law and technology. P. Branco, N. Hosen, M. Leone and R. Mohr (eds), Tools of Meaning: Representation, Objects, and Agency in the Technologies of Law and Religion, I Saggi di Lexia, Aracne, Rome, 2017-2018, pp. 4-9.
13. Hildebrandt M. Position on artificial intelligence and the law’, Position paper for hearing/round table discussion on Artificial Intelligence in the administration of justice, on at the Second Chamber of Parliament of the Netherlands, 2018, March 29. Kamerstukken (Chamber documents) II 2018Z05199.
14. Van Opijnen M. Legal(ly) linked data. Computerrecht, 2018, February, no. 55.
15. Scherer M. Artificial Intelligence and Legal Decision-Making: The Wide Open? Study on the Ehample of International Arbitration, 2019, May 22. Queen Mary School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 318/2019. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3392669/.
