RotM Artificial Intelligence can predict the outcomes of European Court of Human Rights trials to a high accuracy, according to research published today. The use of AI has is slowly seeping into many industries including the legal sector. AI can trawl through vast amounts of information at a faster rate than humans without slowing down, making it easier for lawyers to prepare for hearings. The paper, published in PeerJ Computer Science, shows that the new software has gone one step further. It can judge the final result of legal trials based on the information in human rights cases to 79 per cent accuracy.

An artificial intelligence system designed to predict the outcomes of cases at the European Court of Human Rights would side with the human judges 79 percent of the time. Researchers at University College London and the University of Sheffield in the U.K., and the University of Pennsylvania in the U.S., described the system in a paper published Monday by the Peer Journal of Computer Science. "We formulated a binary classification task where the input of our classifiers is the textual content extracted from a case and the target output is the actual judgment as to whether there has been a violation of an article of the convention of human rights," wrote the paper's authors, Nikolaos Aletras, Dimitrios Tsarapatsanis, Daniel Preo?iuc-Pietro and Vasileios Lampos. The system examined public court documents relating to 584 cases of violations of articles 3 (prohibiting torture), 6 (right to a fair trial) and 8 (respect for private life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, which has been ratified by 47 European countries. The court documents have a distinctive structure, discussing first the procedure by which the case reached the court, the facts and circumstances of the case, relevant law, and the legal arguments applied.

Artificial intelligence researchers have developed software that is capable of making complex decisions to accurately predict the outcome of human rights trials. The AI "judge" was developed by computer scientists at University College London (UCL), the University of Sheffield and the University of Pennsylvania using an algorithm that analyzed the text of cases at the European Court of Human Rights. Judicial decisions from the court were predicted with 79 percent accuracy by the machine learning algorithm. "Previous studies have predicted outcomes based on the nature of the crime, or the policy position of each judge, so this is the first time judgments have been predicted using analysis of text prepared by the court," said Vasileios Lampos, co-author of the research. The study follows warnings from several high-profile academics and entrepreneurs that AI could pose an existential risk to mankind. According to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, advanced AI could be "more dangerous than nukes," while in 2015 physicist Stephen Hawking suggested it could lead to the end of humanity.

The computer scientists from the University College London and the University of Sheffield developed a software that can predict the outcome of the real life cases in court trials. The software was said to have predicted the verdict of the European Court of Human Rights with 79% accuracy. The scientists developed an algorithm that did not only consider and weigh up legal evidences, but also took considerations of what's right and wrong. The A.I. 'judge' has gotten the same decision at the European courts in almost four out of five cases relating to torture, degrading treatment and privacy. To develop the software, what the scientists did was to have an A.I. computer scan 584 cases with published judgements and examine the information in each case until it was able to come up with its own verdict.

Over the past few decades, smart machines and robots have taken on numerous manual labor jobs, and developments are showing no signs of stopping. Where does this leave the future of the work force? Surely only blue collar jobs are at risk, right? In a new study, father-and-son Richard and Daniel Susskind, information technology researchers, sought to debunk the standing belief that some human experts--like doctors, lawyers, and accountants--cannot be replaced by robots equipped with artificial intelligence (AI). The belief is maintained by the claim that there's just some things too tricky for robots, like subjective judgement, creativity, and empathy.

An artificial intelligence "judge" that can accurately predict many of Europe's top human rights court rulings has been created by a team of computer scientists and legal experts. The AI system--developed by researchers from University College London, the University of Sheffield, and the University of Pennsylvania--parsed 584 cases which had previously been heard at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), and successfully predicted 79 percent of the decisions. A machine learning algorithm was trained to search for patterns in English-language datasets relating to three articles of the European Convention on Human Rights: Article 3, concerning torture and inhuman and degrading treatment; Article 6, which protects the right to fair trial; and Article 8, on the right to a private and family life. The cases examined were equally split between those that did find rights violations and those that didn't. Despite the AI's success, the legal profession is safe for now.

Alex Da Kid wanted a deeper connection with his audience. But with so many millions out there, he needed a better way to listen to all of them. Watson AlchemyLanguage API helped by analyzing five years of natural language texts including New York Times front pages, Supreme Court rulings, Getty Museum statements, the most edited Wikipedia articles, popular movie synopses and more. Once Watson had learned the most significant cultural themes, Watson Tone Analyzer read news articles, blogs and tweets to find out what people felt about them.

A team of researchers has used an artificial intelligence system to correctly predict the outcome of hundreds of human rights cases. The AI, developed in collaboration between University College London, the University of Sheffield and the University of Pennsylvania, analysed a variety of cases heard in the European Court of Human Rights. It was then able to predict the correct verdict with an accuracy of 79%. While the results make a convincing case for the use of machine learning in legal settings, the researchers don't believe it will mark the end of lawyers and judges. "There is a lot of hype about AI but we don't see it replacing judges or lawyers any time soon," said Dr Nikolaos Aletras, leader of the study at UCL. "What we do think is they'd find it useful for rapidly identifying patterns in cases that lead to certain outcomes."

Using Artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning technology, a team of researchers has predicted outcomes in judicial decisions at the European Court of Human Rights (EctHR) with 79 per cent accuracy. The AI method, developed by researchers from University College London (UCL), University of Sheffield and US-based University of Pennsylvania is the first to predict the outcomes of a major international court by automatically analysing case text using a machine learning algorithm. "We don't see AI replacing judges or lawyers but we think they will find it useful for rapidly identifying patterns in cases that lead to certain outcomes," said Nikolaos Aletras, who led the study at UCL's computer science department. "It could also be a valuable tool for highlighting which cases are most likely to be violations of the European Convention on Human Rights," Aletras added. In developing the method, the team found that judgements by the ECtHR are highly correlated to non-legal facts rather than directly legal arguments, suggesting that judges of the Court are'realists' rather than'formalists'.

The system was developed by researchers at University College London (UCL), the University of Sheffield and the University of Pennsylvania. The study, led by Dr. Nikolaos Aletras, was published in the PeerJ Computer Science journal today. The team developed artificial intelligence software capable of detecting patterns in complex decisions. The researchers tasked the computer with weighing up legal evidence and moral questions of right and wrong, enabling it to act as a judge in court cases. The technology is more commonly applied to engagement analysis for films and music but it proved to be adept at reaching legal verdicts.