Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Criminal Justice and Artificial Intelligence: How Should we Assess the Performance of Sentencing Algorithms?Jesper Ryberg - 2024 - Philosophy and Technology 37 (1):1-15.
    Artificial intelligence is increasingly permeating many types of high-stake societal decision-making such as the work at the criminal courts. Various types of algorithmic tools have already been introduced into sentencing. This article concerns the use of algorithms designed to deliver sentence recommendations. More precisely, it is considered how one should determine whether one type of sentencing algorithm (e.g., a model based on machine learning) would be ethically preferable to another type of sentencing algorithm (e.g., a model based on old-fashioned programming). (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Sentencing Disparity and Artificial Intelligence.Jesper Ryberg - 2023 - Journal of Value Inquiry 57 (3):447-462.
    The idea of using artificial intelligence as a support system in the sentencing process has attracted increasing attention. For instance, it has been suggested that machine learning algorithms may help in curbing problems concerning inter-judge sentencing disparity. The purpose of the present article is to examine the merits of this possibility. It is argued that, insofar as the unfairness of sentencing disparity is held to reflect a retributivist view of proportionality, it is not necessarily the case that increasing inter-judge uniformity (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Justice by Algorithm: The Limits of AI in Criminal Sentencing.Isaac Taylor - 2023 - Criminal Justice Ethics 42 (3):193-213.
    Criminal justice systems have traditionally relied heavily on human decision-making, but new technologies are increasingly supplementing the human role in this sector. This paper considers what general limits need to be placed on the use of algorithms in sentencing decisions. It argues that, even once we can build algorithms that equal human decision-making capacities, strict constraints need to be placed on how they are designed and developed. The act of condemnation is a valuable element of criminal sentencing, and using algorithms (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Iudicium ex Machinae – The Ethical Challenges of Automated Decision-Making in Criminal Sentencing.Frej Thomsen - 2022 - In Julian Roberts & Jesper Ryberg (eds.), Principled Sentencing and Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press.
    Automated decision making for sentencing is the use of a software algorithm to analyse a convicted offender’s case and deliver a sentence. This chapter reviews the moral arguments for and against employing automated decision making for sentencing and finds that its use is in principle morally permissible. Specifically, it argues that well-designed automated decision making for sentencing will better approximate the just sentence than human sentencers. Moreover, it dismisses common concerns about transparency, privacy and bias as unpersuasive or inapplicable. The (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Criminal Sentencing and Artificial Intelligence: What is the Input Problem?Jesper Ryberg - forthcoming - Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-18.
    The use of artificial intelligence as an instrument to assist judges in determining sentences in criminal cases is an issue that gives rise to many theoretical challenges. The purpose of this article is to examine one of these challenges known as the “input problem.” This problem arises supposedly due to two reasons: that in order for an algorithm to be able to provide a sentence recommendation, it needs to be inputted with case specific information; and that the task of presenting (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark