AI

Across jurisdictions, criminal justice systems are enamored with the evidence-based practices movement. The idea is to utilize the best scientific data to identify and classify individuals based on their potential...

Our research covers issues like tort liability and criminal liability of AI systems, as well as taxation of the use of AI. See below for some of our recent publications. Don't miss our related projects on law and...

The first online Surrey Workshop on Jurisprudence and AI discusses two papers in progress on AI, agency and the criminal law.

Three days of seminars, roundtables and a hackathon at Surrey Law School on how AI is changing the law, legal practice and access to justice.

Prof. Melissa Hamilton presents her research exploring forensic AI’s role and potential flaws in criminal risk assessments within justice systems.

The webinar begins with a speech by Dr Alex Leveringhaus (Surrey Politics) on the role of AI technologies in influencing democratic processes; in particular, elections. This is followed by Prof Amelia Hadfield (Surrey Politics) who talks about how our policy-making processes have become more and more data-driven, and how this raises important questions on where to draw the line on AI affecting political decision-making. Then, Dr Adam Wyner (Swansea Computer Science) underlines a common misconception in picturing AI as solely consisting in Bottom-Up machine-learning mechanisms. Instead, the actual picture is one where Top-Down approaches to knowledge engineering are as relevant as ever for dealing with complex datasets. Finally, Mr Miklos Orban (OPL/Explico) explains how there is very little understanding in society as to the purposes, capabilities and implications of AI. In fact, there seems to be a tendency to polarize the discussion in two extremes, none of which captures correctly the promises as well as the concerns involved with AI.

We argue that criminal law falls short in cases where an AI functionally commits a crime and there are no practically or legally identifiable upstream criminal actors.

Automated risk assessment is all the rage in the criminal justice system. Proponents view risk assessment as an objective way to reduce mass incarceration without sacrificing public safety. Officials thus are becoming heavily invested in risk assessment tools—with their reliance upon big data and algorithmic processing—to inform decisions on managing offenders according to their risk profiles.

The ProPublica/Northpointe racial bias debate, and the broader issue of algorithmic fairness, present significant dilemmas for criminal justice officials, legal practitioners, data scientists, and policymakers. This...

This essay reports original research using a large dataset of offenders who were scored on the popular risk assessment tool COMPAS.

Inventive machines pose existential threat to current patent norms and standards.

Today, judges across the U.S. use risk assessment tools like COMPAS in sentencing decisions. In at least 10 states, these tools are a formal part of the sentencing process. Elsewhere, judges informally refer to them for...