Abstract
Predictive judicial analytics holds the promise of increasing efficiency and fairness of law. Judicial analytics can assess extra-legal factors that influence decisions. Behavioral anomalies in judicial decision-making offer an intuitive understanding of feature relevance, which can then be used for debiasing the law. A conceptual distinction between inter-judge disparities in predictions and interjudge disparities in prediction accuracy suggests another normatively relevant criterion with regards to fairness. Predictive analytics can also be used in the first step of causal inference, where the features employed in the first step are exogenous to the case. Machine learning thus offers an approach to assess bias in the law and evaluate theories about the potential consequences of legal change.
Keywords
Judicial Analytics; Causal Inference; Behavioral Judging;
Replaces
Daniel L. Chen, “Judicial Analytics and the Great Transformation of American Law”, TSE Working Paper, n. 18-974, December 2018.
Reference
Daniel L. Chen, “Judicial Analytics and the Great Transformation of American Law”, Artificial Intelligence and the Law, vol. 27, n. 1, March 2019, pp. 15–42.
See also
Published in
Artificial Intelligence and the Law, vol. 27, n. 1, March 2019, pp. 15–42