Table 4

Summary of robot judge perspective

Main focusKey observationsChallenges/Implications
Definition and scopeRobot judges are systems that go beyond support roles to make autonomous decisions; still largely theoretical but under active explorationRaises serious concerns about legitimacy, transparency, and the irreplaceable human qualities like empathy, discretion and moral reasoning
Algorithmic fairnessFairness must account for background structural injustices; principles like “role reversibility” and “empathetic AI” introduced to guide developmentAlgorithms may perpetuate or magnify existing biases if not properly trained or audited
Real case studies (COMPAS, HART)Semi-automated tools illustrate practical use cases and pitfalls (e.g. racial bias in COMPAS); debate on human-in-the-loop vs on-the-loop systemsLack of transparency and accountability in decision logic can lead to discriminatory practices and loss of public trust
Legal personality and governanceConcepts like AI legal personhood or responsibility attribution explored to handle liability; EU’s AIA proposes stratified risk regulationLegal frameworks still insufficient to handle complex scenarios of AI autonomy; need proactive, interdisciplinary policy design
Source(s): Created by authors

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal