Research tracker
AI-generated text. This page was generated using artificial intelligence.
Academic papers on AI and law, covering both the law governing AI and AI used in legal work. Browse every indexed record below, or start with the reading guide. See Research scope and coverage for inclusion rules, sources checked and gaps.
469 papers indexed. This is a growing bibliography. Descriptions draw on linked bibliographic records and, where reviewed, abstracts; they are not full-paper reviews. Publication types are shown separately, and peer review is identified only where it has been confirmed. Historical legal analysis should be read alongside current law.
Browse the complete catalogue below. Use your browser’s Find command to search this page if interactive filters are unavailable.
This paper addresses: Hospitals as AI Deployers: Organisational Failures and Direct Liability Risks.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Copyright and Generative AI: Guidance from Economic Incentive Theory for a Nuanced Regime for Author Remuneration.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Off‐The‐Shelf Large Language Models Are Unreliable Judges.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Silicon Formalism: Rules, Standards, and Judge AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: From the Soul Life of the Creator to the Black Box of the AI Chatbot: How to Close the Attribution Gap of AI Output.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Beyond the DPO Model? The EU AI Act’s Accountability Framework Without a Mandated AI Officer.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Owning the Afterlife? Reframing AI “Resurrections” Through a Dignity Lens.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Trademark Confusion After the Algorithmic Turn.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Crowd Discrimination in the Digital Workplace: How AI and Platforms Translate Public Bias into Employment Practices.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Predictive Protest Policing.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: A Right to Delegate to AI: The Regulatory Safety Halo and the Acceleration of Agentic Consumer Markets.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Dong and colleagues present Law-CoT, a language-model framework for assessing traffic-crash liability using case evidence and retrieved statutes.
This paper addresses: Can Artificial Intelligence Hear a Litigant Within the Meaning of Article 6 ECHR.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Feeding the machine: remuneration, transparency and the limits of copyright in the age of generative AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulation, trust, and GenAI adoption: a comparative analysis of the EU and US approaches.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Li and colleagues propose LegalMALR, a multi-agent search and language-model reranking framework for retrieving Chinese statutes, and evaluate it on legal-query datasets.
The January 2026 arXiv preprint and October 2026 journal article are grouped.
This paper addresses: Artificial intelligence in the military domain: challenges and an adaptive multilevel governance framework.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Persistent Agent Memory under the EU AI Act and NIS2: Misalignment, Emergent Behaviour and Regulatory Fit.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: From the Law of the Horse to the Workflow: Why Institutions, Not the Model, Decide the EU AI Act’s Effectiveness: Lessons from Hungary’s First-Wave Implementation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Demir and Canbaz introduce PARCEL, a benchmark for assessing whether cited New York court decisions support legal claims generated by language models.
Read repository paper · arXiv:2610.10971
Repository posting October 7, 2026. The repository claims a June 2026 ICAIL proceedings publication; the timing and proceedings record require independent verification.
Krištofík argues for governance of the systems involved in generative AI legal work alongside lawyers’ professional duties.
This paper addresses: Relational Protocols for Human–Machine Dialogue in the Age of Co-developmental AI: Legal, Social, and Cultural Perspectives in Asia.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Canto Moniz examines how GDPR rules on personal data, anonymisation and pseudonymisation apply to language-model tokenisation.
This paper addresses: The complexities and guises of anonymity: privacy-enhancing technologies and medical AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Chaitra C R and colleagues evaluate a generative approach to representing the structure of Indian legal sentences.
Stanizzi examines how automated decision systems redistribute administrative discretion and affect public accountability and review.
This paper addresses: AI Sovereignty, Data Bias, and Ethical Challenges in International Law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial Intelligence and the Protection of Healthcare Information in China: A Rule of Law Discussion.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Risk for AI Agents.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Establishing Responsibility Systems for AI Application in Clinical Decision-Making: A Relational Responsibility Perspective.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Inferential privacy and the duty of data loyalty.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial Intelligence, Regulatory Capacity, and the Adaptive State.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Algorithmic Governance and International Law: Reconciling Sovereignty and Cross-Border Accountability.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Van Domselaar and Banks examine how assistive AI may affect judges’ perception and evaluation of legally significant facts.
The research record gives September 24, 2026; the journal assigns the article to its December 2026 issue.
Khera and colleagues evaluate general-purpose language models on European patent-attorney examination tasks and compare automated scoring with experts’ assessments of their explanations.
This paper addresses: Copyright as an institution of accountability in the age of artificial intelligence.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Elmahjub and colleagues introduce a benchmark across multiple schools of Islamic jurisprudence and evaluate language models’ legal knowledge, reasoning and responses to false premises.
This paper addresses: Watermarking large language models in Europe: interpreting the AI act in light of technology.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Gaps in Nigeria’s artificial intelligence and intellectual property legal and policy frameworks and the need for synergy: a comparative analysis.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Should the Legal Concept of Speech Include Chatbot Output in US Law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI hallucinations, commercial misinformation and user liability under Chinese unfair competition law: Alibaba v Li.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: When the Opt-Out Fails: Unfair Competition Law and the Control of AI Training Inputs in the EU.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Papadopoulou examines authors’ moral rights in relation to AI training and outputs, and proposes approaches to EU regulation.
This paper addresses: AI’s role in gender diversity: a new era for corporate leadership.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Copyrighting Prompts: A Path to Authentic AI or a Legal Overreach.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Friends in our phones? Legal responses to AI companions.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Algorithmic Sentencing and Fairness Perceptions.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Causation in War Crimes of Harm Committed via AI-based Loitering Weapons.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Algorithmic Medicine and the Duty to Disclose: Informed Consent Through the Lens of Radiology.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Pham, Cha and Poole examine competing accounts of AI bias and their implications for antidiscrimination law.
Swisher examines proxy discrimination in AI and proposes changes to assessment and enforcement.
Roth and Wexler consider whether privilege and work-product doctrine can protect some communications with legal AI tools.
Valeska examines how automated school surveillance can affect disability rights and equal access to education.
Chang analyzes AI hiring-vendor liability under Title VII and agency law.
Vagle examines how AI-assisted investigations and automation bias can affect police accountability.
Kim and Eisler argue that access to system and outcome data can help enforce disparate-impact law against algorithmic discrimination.
Read law-review essay or article · https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/disparate-algorithmic-advantage/ · Earlier SSRN preprint
The 2026 SSRN preprint and law-review essay are grouped.
Banks and colleagues examine disparate-impact doctrine and racial discrimination in the use of AI.
This paper addresses: Mind the competitiveness gap: Measuring the AI Act’s extraterritorial reach.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: What are AI systems? Rethinking the core definition in the EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The enforced technical mandate: A multi-layered governance model for deepfake fraud and biometric integrity.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: From colonial judicial legacy to algorithmic justice: Preparing Africa’s judiciary for the algorithmic courtroom.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The transparency architecture in the AI Act: From system requirements to a right to explanation under article 86.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI risk perceptions and the effect of AI Act Safeguards. Results from a representative population sample.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
The constitutional foundation of explanation rights in EU digital regulation: An integrated approach
This paper addresses: The constitutional foundation of explanation rights in EU digital regulation: An integrated approach.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Generative AI and the risk to environmental justice.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Addressing algorithmic discrimination through OECD national contact points – the changing landscape for tech companies.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Rules Without Models: Why Europe Must Build the AI It Regulates.
The 2026 preprint and journal version are grouped.
This paper addresses: AILQA: Evaluating AI-driven legal question answering systems for the indian legal system.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Technological constitutionalism in the quantum-AI era: ASEAN's post-sovereign response.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Agentic AI systems as a responsibility-attribution problem in autonomous cyber operations.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Access to uncontaminated data for AI training.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Human realignment.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Accountability shift in human–AI collaborations.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Unpacking the state-private nexus in China’s AI development path.
The 2025 ECGI working paper and 2026 journal article are grouped.
This paper addresses: Are AI Models Infringing Imported "Articles" under Copyright Law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Deconstructing the Dichotomy: A Critical Look at AI 's Place in Law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial Intelligence and Family Law: The Impact of the EU AI Act Regulatory Framework and Principles on the Use of AI in Family Proceedings.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Explainable Statute Prediction via Attention-based Model and LLM Prompting.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The FRIA in EU AI Act: governance, rights, and global jurisdiction.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Effective remedies for job applicants in algorithmic recruitment: the contribution of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Considerations for regulating AI-enabled manipulation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Intelligent support for soil and water conservation compliance: decision assistance capabilities of prompt-enhanced large language models.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: After the AI Liability Directive: Civil Liability for Healthcare AI and the Limits of EU Risk Regulation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Legal imaginations of the AI Act: A constitutional perspective on the pre-emption of Member State competence.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The Use of Artificial Intelligence in South African Boardrooms: Company Law Implications and Challenges.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial intelligence—a call to recalibrate copyright law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: COMPLIANCE THEATRE: RETHINKING EVALUATION AND ENFORCEMENT IN FRONTIER AI REGULATION.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Content Culpability in the Age of Algorithms:<em> Anderson</em> and the Future of Section 230.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The Machine’s Mind Matters: Using Logic to Disclose Artificial Intelligence Inventions.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: A New Frontier? Exploring Artificial Intelligence in Corporate Insolvency.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Automated private enforcement: evidence from the Google Fonts Case.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Mitigating the judicial human–AI fairness gap.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Disclosing Without Divulging: Trade Secrets in the EU AI Act’s Transparency Duties.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Cognitive Debt and the Regulatory Blind Spot: Bridging Neurocognitive Evidence, Practitioner Observation and the EU AI Act on AI in Education.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: LLM as a law professor: having a large language model write a commentary on freedom of assembly.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Easy and hard problems: mapping the challenges of AI in law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Inference as the defining criterion of AI: rethinking the EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Logic-based interpretability and analysis of neural legal AI models.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Towards a Transdisciplinary Governance of Artificial Intelligence in Africa.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Towards an African Union Treaty on Artificial Intelligence: Reconciling African Values with Global Standards.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Bridging the Legal-technical Gap: AI Surveillance and Data Sovereignty in Africa.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Centering Intellectual Property in Artificial Intelligence Strategies in Africa Through a Techno-legal Analysis.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Accountable Predictive Policing of Cybercrime? Insights from Nigerian Law Enforcement.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulating Reality: Exploring Synthetic Media Through Multistakeholder AI Governance.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Copyright liability for AI-outputs: the impact of Mio/konektra on staged photography.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulatory Autonomy and AI Sovereignty: Türkiye at a Crossroad.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Governing Without Enforcing: Foundational Legal Infrastructure and the Capacity–Justiciability Gap in AI Rights Protection.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Chief Justice Robots: Turning the World into a Sci‐Fi Scenario.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: LLM-assisted formalization for deterministic detection of statutory inconsistency in tax law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Racing to Safety: Tax Policy for AI Safety-By-Design.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Algorithmic Crawling vs. Copyright Protection: Defining the Boundaries of Fair Use in Text and Data Mining for AI Training.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Mining legal arguments to study judicial formalism.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Judgment Cannot Be Delegated: A Subject-Preserving Framework for AI Governance.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial Intelligence in Trademark Adjudication: A Comparative European Overview of Judicial Practice and Governance.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Bench and Algorithm: China’s Courts Roll Out AI-Powered Digital Judge Systems.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Sycophantic AI Systems and Companion AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Generative AI in child sexual exploitation and abuse: views from UK law enforcement.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Predictive policing and predictive justice: Ethics, data protection, and the AI act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Adjudicative AI and distributive justice.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The AI Gospel according to the EDPB–An overview of opinion 28/2024 on data protection aspects in AI models.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Comparing the right to an explanation of judicial AI by function; studies on the EU, Brazil, and China.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Judicial expert frameworks as inspiration for the use of AI in courts.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Toward a proportionate explainability framework in administrative automated decision-making: A lesson from China.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Accuracy paradox: Addressing epistemic, manipulative, and societal risks of hallucination in AI governance.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Semantic frameworks to support implementation of the EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Impact assessment requirements in the GDPR vs the AI Act: Overlaps, divergence, and implications.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI, climate, and regulation: From data centers to the AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Transparency in human-AI interaction – An analysis of Article 50(1) AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Bridging fairness in machine learning: A legal critique of technical strategies.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Data protection in the era of agentic artificial intelligence.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Training on the tightrope: AI copyright and data privacy as colliding regulatory regimes.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Positioning synthetic data under EU data protection law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Another View on Article 22 GDPR: The Future of Automated Decision-Making.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The Thaler Decision in India and the Crisis of Anthropocentric Patent Theory: AI, Inventorship and the Future of Innovation Governance.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: General-Purpose AI under the EU AI Act: A Conceptual Allocation of Duties across the Value Chain.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: From Sampling to Generative AI: The Scope of Pastiche after Pelham II.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Why Getty Images v Stability AI got secondary copyright infringement wrong.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Joralemon examines pharmacist-duty doctrine as a possible framework for harmful drug advice from AI systems.
This paper addresses: Automatic extraction and collection of legal principles from CJEU decisions on Fiscal State Aid.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Using Large Language Models to Measure the Ideology of Supreme Court Justices.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Can Software Copyright in the EU Survive the End of Programming.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Human-centric digital decision making: A new interdisciplinary psycho-legal assessment framework.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Making algorithmic transparency enforceable: sufficient intelligibility, technical evidence, and auditability across the EU and the US.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: CourtSim-LLM: fine-tuning large language models with multi-turn dialogues for chinese mock trials.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Cinema, AI and Copyright: Reflexion on the Copyrightability of AI-Assisted Works in the US, EU and Italy, and the Role of Terms of Use.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Humans as Legal Technology: The Emergence of “New Humans” in European Technology Regulation and a Suggestion for a New Approach to Legal Technology.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Automated Decision Making in Financial Services: Striking a Balance Between Innovation and Financial Inclusion.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Hu examines the philosophical implications of large language models for legal reasoning and the application of law.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: Linguistic Turn" and the Application of Law by Artificial Intelligence
Wen and colleagues present a post-hoc alignment approach for language models performing knowledge-intensive legal tasks.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: Legal Aligner: a post-hoc alignment approach for knowledge-intensive legal tasks
Meeùs and colleagues propose a framework for documenting and governing AI-generated three-dimensional reconstructions used as legal evidence.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: 3Dex: towards a legal framework for AI-based 3D modeling from visual evidence
Dugac and Altwicker examine sequential methods for monitoring changes in legal data and legal-domain language models.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: Dynamic legal data: sequential analysis for real-time empirical assessment
Suttle and Lillis study how language models used as legal decision tools respond to arguments and their persuasive force.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: Persuadability and LLMs as legal decision tools
Irbe demonstrates an AI-supported investigative system designed to challenge hypotheses and preserve alternative explanations.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: From oracle to sparring partner: devil's advocate for AI-supported hypothesis stress-testing in legal investigations
David and colleagues study prompting strategies for a proactive legal chatbot using an immigration eligibility assessment.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: PermitBot: a user study on prompting legal chatbots for proactivity
Steging and Zbiegień examine missing counterfactual outcomes in bail data and their implications for automated decision support.
Read conference manuscripts · ICAIL 2026 accepted manuscript: Confronting Label Indeterminacy in Automated Bail Decisions · Repository version
Conference manuscript and repository version are grouped.
Kannegieter examines nondeterministic language-model outputs and tort liability.
This paper addresses: From Estimation to Discrimination: Algorithmic Bias, Predictive Uncertainty, and Anti‐Discrimination Law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Comparing the right to information about automated decision-making to the new right to explanation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulating Recommender Systems? Effects of Data-Based Individualization (and its Limits) on Competition in the Digital World.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: How well can large language model agents simulate complex legal dispute resolution.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Scenario-based Bayesian networks for legal evidence.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Gatekeeping privacy in the algorithmic society: rethinking China’s platform compliance regime.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Remote AI weapons detection: reversing ‘stop and search’ to ‘search and stop’.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI Agents in Payments: Applications, Risks and Regulations.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Explainable throughout the AI lifecycle: the evolution of the explainability provisions in the EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial Intelligence and Equality at Work: Evaluating the Adequacy of The UK Legal Framework For Responding to The Discrimination Risks of New Technologies.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Beyond optimization: the non-computable core of law and the limits of AI-mediated legal decision-making.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Ghost in the Shell: Inferred Groups under the AI Act and the GDPR. Concrete Solutions for System Sync.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Algorithmic judging: lessons of logic and jurisprudence.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulatory Governance of AI in the Generative AI Era: A Comparative Study of South Korea’s AI Basic Act and the EU AI Act for Sustainable Digital Transformation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI-driven legal argument strength analyzer & counter-argument generator.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial Life Imitates Art: How Freelancers Can Combat a Generative AI Fair Use Defense.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Explainability gaps in AI-driven criminal justice governance: the RisCanvi case.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Thaler in Japan: more of the same.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Harmonising Trade Secret Protection in AI: Innovation, Opacity and Digital Vulnerability.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Missing the Mark: Adoption of Watermarking for Generative AI Systems in Practice and Implications Under the New EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI Penalty in Judicial Reasoning: Indistinguishable From Human, Devalued When Revealed.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Building on Campbell to develop a new tort of publicity rights in England for the AI age.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Vyas examines confidentiality and work-product protection for self-represented litigants communicating with AI.
Landeros examines electricity regulation and energy policy in light of growing AI infrastructure demand.
This paper addresses: An Assessment of Racial Disparities in Pretrial Decision‐Making Using Misclassification Models.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: From unstructured text to structured reasoning: a hybrid knowledge graph for Indonesian sentencing analysis.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
The authors report a randomized study of law students performing legal tasks with reasoning and retrieval-augmented AI tools, comparing the results with work without AI assistance.
Authors Schwarcz, Manning and Prescott are identified as co-first authors in the journal publication.
This paper addresses: Grading Machines: Can AI Exam-Grading Replace Law Professors.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Legal citation prediction with LLMs: a comparative evaluation of instruction tuning, retrieval, and jurisdiction-specific pre-training on the AusLaw citation benchmark.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Bending the Rules: On Large Language Models and Content Moderation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Creations in the Age of AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI and the Courts: What If Judges Rely Upon AI for Judgements.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Novelli and colleagues examine the design and governance of regulatory sandboxes under the EU AI Act.
The 2025 SSRN preprint and 2026 journal article are grouped.
This paper addresses: Algorithmic challenges in online content moderation: exploring human rights and copyright issues and proposing data trusts as a policy solution.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Extrajudicial and judicial remedies in algorithm-assisted decision-making: The case of EU it systems for migration and security.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial intelligence and adjudication: A new pathway to justice in China.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Platform work and algorithmic management: Protecting workers irrespectively of their employment status.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Augmented inventorship: rethinking patent law in the age of generative AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Quantifying fairness in spatial predictive policing.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Supreme People’s Court of China defines standards for determining whether AI core algorithm elements constitute trade secrets.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Abiri examines corporate governance and the constitutional framing of AI systems.
Huber examines copyright protection for AI-generated melodies and the All the Music project.
This paper addresses: The trade-off between robustness and reliability in chinese legal large language models: an empirical study.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: A New Kid on the EU’s Co-Regulatory Block: Codes of Practice under the AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Virtual Judgments: Testing the Chivalry Hypothesis and Attribution Theory in AI Models.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI-Enabled Price Discrimination as an Exploitative Abuse of Dominance under EU Competition Law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: How Future-Proof is the DMA? A Case Study Of AI Agents.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Operationalising the Twin Transition: From EU Constitutional Principles to National AI Strategies.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: RECONCILING TRADE SECRETS AND AI PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Posner and Saran compare language-model responses with an earlier judicial experiment involving an international criminal-law case.
View source record · DOI: 10.1177/2755323X261433614 · Earlier repository record · Published journal article (2026)
The 2025 working paper, titled Judge AI: Assessing Large Language Models in Judicial Decision-Making, and the 2026 journal article are grouped. The experiment used a simulated international criminal-law appeal.
This paper addresses: Revised USPTO guidance on inventorship for AI-assisted inventions: a pro-innovation pivot away from Pannu factors.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Administration of Justice: Suggested Framework of Ethical Principles and Reasoning of Judges in the Use of Intelligent Systems.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Artificial intelligence in the judiciary: a systematic literature review on the practical applications.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Copyright and Patent Laws for the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Authorship and Inventorship Revisited.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Reciprocal trust and distrust in artificial intelligence systems: the hard problem of regulation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Modular and agentic AI design, jailbreaking, and scheming behaviours as challenges to the EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Implications of regulating a moving target: between fixity and flexibility in the EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Demystifying Performers' Rights in the Age of Artificial Intelligence.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: LLM-as-a-judge is bad, based on AI attempting the exam qualifying for the member of the Polish National Board of Appeal.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Facial recognition on trial: data protection, discrimination, and the ethics of algorithmic governance in policing.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Machine learning in legal decision-making: analysis of judicial and algorithmic reasoning in road homicide cases.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: GEMA v. OpenAI : The Munich Regional Court Presents an Exemplary Judgment on a Well Conceived Test Case.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Data Is Nothing Like Oil: Dusting Off Copyright’s Originality Doctrine for the AI Age.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Hierarchical models of precedential constraint.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Metaphors we judge (AI) by: a rhetorical analysis of artificial copyright disputes.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Generative AI in legal education: a two-year experiment with ChatGPT.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Processing of synthetic data in AI development for healthcare and the definition of personal data in EU law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulating AI-Driven Triage: Fundamental Rights and Compliance Challenges in the European Union.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Incident reporting and investigation under the AI act: some insights from aviation.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Rethinking Robot Liability.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Smith examines collective-bargaining obligations under the National Labor Relations Act when AI replaces workers.
This paper addresses: AI, access to justice, and judicial accountability in India: navigating the future.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulatory cooperation in AI sandboxes: insights from Fintech.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI data governance – overlaps between the AI Act and the GDPR.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The Applicability of Product Liability to Artificial Intelligence Systems.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The evolving role of AI in legal judgment.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Anonymization in healthcare AI under GDPR: measurable privacy protection and global implications.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Balancing Innovation and Control: Public Views on Risks and Governance of AI in Political Communication.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Text and Data Mining, Generative AI, and the Copyright Three-Step Test.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Judges-in-the-loop? Judicial involvement in human oversight of high-risk decision support systems under the EU AI Act.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Will the EU AI Act help to mitigate dataset bias in medical AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: How the Legal Basis for AI Training is Framed in Data Protection Guidelines and Interventions: Comparative Perspectives and the Prospect of Global Convergence.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Why IP’s AI Debate Is Really About Market Power.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The interpreter’s trap: how explainable AI launders uncertainty into justification—a socio-legal case study of COMPAS risk assessment.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Regulatory challenges and liability pathways for AI-powered robots in EU medical practice.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Neural reranking for UK statutory retrieval: Provision-level evaluation and an open distilled model.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Re-centring the human in AI-era copyright and patent law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: The case for contextual copyleft: licensing open-source training data and generative AI.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Chinese court denied the copyrightability of AI-generated images for the first time in (2025) Su 0582 Min Zhong No. 4840.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Ensuring compliance with the UN guiding principles through contract: can AI help.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: (Re)Individualizing Criminal Law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Cognitive bias in AI legal decision-making.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Content-aware instruction for zero-shot Chinese criminal legal case retrieval: a large language model-based framework.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Open Foundation Models and TDM Exceptions to Copyright – Building Blocks for an AI Ecosystem.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI and Legal Education: Ethical and Sustainable Approaches.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Revisiting big data optimism: risks of data-driven black box algorithms for society.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Risk, Reasonableness and Residual Harm under the EU AI Act: A Conceptual Framework for Proportional Ex-Ante Controls.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Generative AI and copyright in the EU and the USA: a view from international investment law.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Providing legal pincite recommendations using language representations.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: Do we still need brands? Revisiting the essential function of trade marks and the consumer model in AI-mediated commerce.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: AI Regulation, Copyright, and Data Mining: A Critical Analysis of the Brazilian Proposal.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
Chesterman examines private technological power, international law and democratic oversight in AI governance.
Open preprint first posted in May 2025; grouped with the 2026 journal article.
Matwyshyn examines organizational use of flawed technologies in legally problematic conduct.
The article discusses broader issues of technology and organizational conduct, including AI.
Murray advances an argument about fair use and the training of generative AI models.
Read published article · Case Western Reserve Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet 17(1), article 4 (2026) · Kentucky institutional record · SSRN preprint
The 2025 working paper and the 2026 published journal article are grouped. The title reflects the author’s legal argument.
Hartzog and colleagues critique limited approaches to AI accountability and consumer protection.
Von Cossel examines a neuro-symbolic approach to assessing online hate speech under German criminal law, combining language models with explicit legal reasoning structures.
Read repository paper · arXiv:2605.16280
The repository describes this as an extended version of a paper accepted at ICAIL 2026. The repository displays an April submission date despite the identifier’s May designation; independent date and proceedings checks remain open.
This paper addresses: Corporate governance and artificial intelligence: The emerging legal challenges in South Africa’s boardrooms.
Subject identified from publisher-deposited bibliographic metadata; the abstract and full text were not reviewed.
This paper addresses: When explanations mislead: Explainability, erroneous compliance, and human oversight in judicial artificial intelligence.
Online publication was accessible by November 1, 2026; the journal assigns this article to its December 2026 issue, and the precise online date was not established.
Jon and Schultz analyze copyright issues at different stages of AI training across US, UK and EU law.
Publisher article and abstract were accessible in November 2026; the journal assigns it to its December 2026 issue.
Introduces a benchmark and framework for translating tax statutes into the Catala programming language.
Tests a method for reducing wrong-document retrieval in legal retrieval-augmented generation.
Introduces a benchmark for structured reasoning about U.S. patent appeal decisions.
Uses a knowledge graph of Indian criminal statutes to support legal statute identification.
Tests the stability of language-model interpretations against human linguistic judgments.
Studies whether legal-role prompts affect how language models select facts and reasoning for case summaries.
Investigates language-model judging methods for evaluating legal responses.
Introduces a Portuguese corpus and extraction pipeline based on Brazilian labor-court documents.
Presents a continuous scale for assessing trademark distinctiveness using synthetic anchors.
Introduces a dataset and retrieval-ranking method for questions requiring several regulatory passages.
Evaluates verifier-based test-time scaling on multiple-choice legal reasoning benchmarks.
Evaluates language-model explanations of advertising disclosure compliance using social-media posts.
Studies prompt optimization for identifying potentially unfair terms-of-service clauses.
Discusses limits of technical safeguards and proposes legal-technical approaches to EU copyright compliance for LLMs.
Benchmarks language models on clause-level commercial-contract risk identification.
Compares language-model methods for extracting fine-grained arguments from judicial decisions.
Evaluates legal-reference recall using a framework based on U.S. court opinions.
Studies model alignment for Thai legal questions and legal citation accuracy.
Lemley and Ouellette distinguish plagiarism from copyright infringement in AI-assisted writing.
Novelli and coauthors analyze competing theories and changing debates about AI legal personhood.
The published 2025 journal article and earlier SSRN record are grouped.
Henderson and Lemley examine the enforceability and policy implications of restrictions imposed in AI model terms of use.
View source record · Indiana Law Journal 100(4):1327 (2025) · Earlier repository record
The published journal article and SSRN working-paper record are grouped.
Coglianese and Crum propose a management-based approach to regulating AI risks.
Magesh and colleagues report a preregistered evaluation of commercial AI legal-research tools, examining accuracy, responsiveness and unsupported answers.
The 2024 preprint and 2025 journal article are grouped. Evaluations describe the tested versions and period, rather than current product performance.
This Harvard Law Review chapter examines AI and antidiscrimination doctrine.
View source record · Harvard Law Review 138:1562 (2025)
Bibas discusses legal-services regulation and AI-enabled access to justice.
Christakis examines AI hallucinations and data-subject rights through GDPR regulatory perspectives and industry responses.
Helleringer and Möslein examine AI and corporate directors’ information duties.
Rauterberg considers how AI may change securities regulation and argues for a systems-oriented approach.
Matsumi and Solove examine legal issues raised by algorithmic predictions about individuals.
Solove and Hartzog examine the tension between large-scale data scraping and privacy law.
Goodyear analyzes secondary copyright liability for information architectures, including generative AI.
Kilian, Jäck and Ebel analyze AI Act standardization and implementation, drawing on interviews with organizations developing AI applications.
Lior analyzes liability insurance policies addressing artificial intelligence.
Ard examines fair-use doctrine and copyright markets in relation to generative AI training.
Solove maps privacy risks associated with AI inputs and outputs and discusses possible legal responses.
Ross examines artificial intelligence and the information needs of democracy.
Murray critiques metaphors used in copyright debates about generative AI.
View source record · Akron Law Review 58(3), article 1 (2025) · SSRN preprint (DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.5116714)
The Akron Law Review article and earlier SSRN preprint are grouped.
Wagner considers potential uses of causal AI in tort law.
Iacobucci examines AI pricing and antitrust analysis.
Lobel argues for a framework of automation rights and duties in some settings.
Ayres and Balkin examine how legal rules based on intent may apply to AI systems.
Combines text embeddings and graph methods for legal-judgment prediction.
Explores automated evaluation of generated long-form legal summaries.
Introduces a dataset for predicting outcomes in UK Employment Tribunal cases.
Studies a multi-step pipeline for summarizing long regulatory texts.
Compares prediction approaches using Indian judicial decisions under a more realistic evaluation setup.
Examines retrieval-augmented question answering concerning Quebec automobile insurance.
Benchmarks methods for assessing whether legal answers are grounded in source material.
Uses platform terms of service to help explain Digital Services Act content-moderation notices.
Presents a generative information-extraction approach for building legal knowledge graphs.
Introduces a legal-argument reasoning dataset based on European Court of Human Rights cases.
Investigates extraction of entities and labels useful for preparing court cases.
Investigates fine-grained evaluation of gaps and hallucinations in machine-generated legal analysis.
Describes and evaluates a composite model designed to improve legal-domain language-model performance.
Uses language models to compare contracts with templates to support negotiation.
Presents a chatbot intended to explain Canadian air-passenger rights.
Cross Examine: An Ensemble-based approach to leverage Large Language Models for Legal Text Analytics
Describes an ensemble approach to legal-text analysis using language models.
Compares explanations for a model predicting outcomes in European Court of Human Rights cases.
Uses prompt chaining and example retrieval for legal information extraction.
Introduces tests of basic legal-text tasks expected of lawyers and paralegals.
Studies automatic anonymization of California parole-hearing transcripts.
Describes a shared-task system for legal inference involving social-media evidence.
Studies attributed answers to questions about preconditions in Dutch law.
Proposes a generative method for consolidating legislative amendments into legal texts.
Novelli and colleagues examine EU liability, privacy, intellectual-property and cybersecurity rules as they relate to generative AI.
The January 2024 arXiv preprint and October 2024 journal article are grouped. The paper examines EU law and proposals as of its publication.
Dahl, Magesh, Suzgun and Ho study factual errors in general-purpose language models’ answers about U.S. federal cases, including variation across courts and time periods.
Online publication date shown; the preprint was first posted January 2, 2024. Results concern the systems and testing period studied.
Forrest discusses ethical and legal questions surrounding AI personhood.
Kaminski and Jones examine how different areas of law construct AI-generated speech.
Mantegna argues that copyright is not an adequate response to several generative-AI policy problems.
Bradford challenges claims that digital regulation necessarily undermines innovation, including in AI.
Solove and Hartzog critique approaches to privacy that rely primarily on individual control over personal data.
Arbel and Hoffman propose using language models to assist contractual interpretation and discuss limitations.
LegalBench: A Collaboratively Built Benchmark for Measuring Legal Reasoning in Large Language Models
Guha and colleagues introduce a collaboratively constructed benchmark of legal-reasoning tasks and evaluate language models, connecting task design with legal professionals’ reasoning frameworks.
Conference publication and preprint are grouped. Tasks predominantly concern U.S. law; benchmark performance is specific to the tested tasks.
Tests transfer of a legal-inference model between U.S. states.
Explores contract unfairness from the perspective of nonlawyer stakeholders.
Mahari and colleagues discuss gaps between legal practice and natural-language-processing research, including implications for access to justice.
Introduces a dataset combining multiple public sources about the U.S. Supreme Court.
Studies retrieval-based evaluation of Korean legal question answering.
Studies retrieval-augmented chain-of-thought question answering in structured domains including law.
Evaluates prompt templates for structured answers to questions about contract clauses.
Analyzes language models for predicting outcomes in French appeal-court decisions.
Examines language-model generation of test specifications for U.S. tax-preparation software.
Studies language models trained across domains for long legal documents.
Evaluates approaches to classifying obligations and other deontic categories in EU legislation.
Tests paragraph-selection strategies for classifying long legal documents.
Examines computational analysis of crypto-asset white papers under EU MiCAR requirements.
Surveys legal judgment-prediction studies and recommends stronger evaluation practices.
Discusses challenges in adapting large language models to legal work.
Jointly models legal-document retrieval and textual entailment.
Introduces an annotated corpus for classifying Italian legislative texts.
Explores open language models for electronic discovery.
Investigates whether pretrained language models acquire knowledge of legal entity types.
Connects structured statutory reasoning with extraction of information from legal texts.
Uses contextual-integrity concepts and language processing to analyze privacy statements.
Studies automatic anonymization of Swiss Federal Supreme Court decisions.
Introduces a dataset for processing legal material concerning refugee claims.
Hacker, Engel and Mauer examine how regulation, data protection and content-moderation duties could apply to generative-model developers, deployers and users.
Published conference paper; the linked repository manuscript was first posted February 5, 2023. Its AI Act discussion predates the final legislation.
Eaglin examines race and algorithmic risk assessment in the criminal legal system.
Lior examines relationships among tort law, liability insurance and emerging technologies.
Chesterman examines when and how ethical AI principles can be implemented through law.
View source record · Source: https://law.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/014_SimonChesterman.pdf
The linked 2023 NUS working paper was followed by a chapter in Handbook on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence (Edward Elgar, 2024), 113–127.
Henderson and colleagues combine U.S. fair-use analysis with experiments on similarity to training material and discuss technical approaches to reducing copyright risks.
Read open version · JMLR 24(400) (2023) · Preprint (March 2023)
The journal article and preprint are one record. Legal analysis reflects the paper’s publication period.
Studies changes in the language of German judicial decisions over time.
Studies transfer of legal text-generation models across domains.
Introduces a legal-argument reasoning task and dataset in U.S. civil procedure.
Examines approaches and challenges in simplifying legal language.
Examines tensions between reproducible legal datasets and individual data rights.
Studies segmentation of legal documents into rhetorical roles.
Adapts transformer architectures to process long legal documents.
Investigates privacy risks and privacy-preserving techniques for legal-language models.
Studies classification and summarization of privacy risks in online terms and conditions.
Examines parameter-efficient adaptation of language models to legal tasks.
Studies terminology extraction in patent documents.
Studies named-entity recognition in Indian judicial decisions.
Discusses development and deployment of smaller legal-technology models.
Studies multi-task domain adaptation for legal named-entity recognition.
Applies stance detection to language in U.S. Supreme Court documents.
Studies generating legal clauses from topics using graph-based planning.
Evaluates detection of sentence boundaries in legal documents.
Presents an annotated legal named-entity recognition corpus.
Investigates identifying meaningful differences between similar legal texts.
Investigates information extraction for quantitative analysis of legal texts.
Tests data augmentation combining lexical resources and word embeddings for legal texts.
Introduces a benchmark for prediction in U.S. class-action cases.
Tests adversarial attacks against systems detecting unfair terms-of-service clauses.
Investigates automatic summaries of Dutch court judgments.
Frames criminal hate-speech rules as a natural-language-processing task.
Chalkidis and colleagues assemble English-language legal-understanding datasets into a common benchmark and compare general-purpose with legal-domain language models.
The 2021 preprint and 2022 conference publication are one record; tasks draw on multiple legal sources rather than one universal legal system.
Bambauer, Mayer and Zarsky examine fairness when small differences in inputs produce different algorithmic outcomes.
Simon examines potential benefits and risks of using AI in law-review submissions.
Henderson and colleagues introduce a legal-text dataset and explore how legal rules about private or harmful material can inform language-model training-data filtering.
The linked arXiv manuscript was first posted July 1, 2022; the proceedings citation and DOI refer to the same conference paper.
Lior examines the role of insurance as a potential governance mechanism for AI-related harms.
Sunstein considers the potential effects of algorithmic decisions on noise and bias.
Lu examines privacy, human rights and algorithmic opacity.
Floridi and colleagues propose a conformity-assessment framework based on the then-proposed EU AI Act.
The work discusses the proposed AI Act and is not an official conformity-assessment standard.
Introduces a multilingual benchmark for predicting Swiss judicial outcomes.
Studies supervised identification of participant roles in English-language contracts.
Investigates automatic summarization of German judicial decisions.
Explores shallow parsing of regulatory text for automated compliance checking.
Investigates automated triage of requests for free legal assistance.
Studies paragraph-level retrieval of legal documents using generated labels and neural similarity.
Studies recognition of named entities in Romanian legal documents.
Combines transformer and state-machine approaches to entity recognition in historical legal texts.
Introduces a Greek legislative dataset for legal-topic classification.
Studies classifying U.S. state tax-law sections and their revenue sources.
Studies extraction of legal terminology for glossaries and downstream analysis.
Studies extracting case factors from long parole-hearing transcripts with limited labels.
Describes domain adaptation of a French legal-language model.
Describes a Romanian legal language model for judgment prediction.
Introduces a German legal-information-retrieval dataset based on case documents.
Few-shot and Zero-shot Approaches to Legal Text Classification: A Case Study in the Financial Sector
Tests few-shot and zero-shot classification on financial-sector legal text.
Studies use of BERT for classifying legal documents.
Explores automated claim construction in patent applications and introduces a dataset.
Introduces prediction of outcomes in domain-name disputes under the UDRP process.
Studies extraction of sentencing decisions from Hebrew court documents.
Presents an information-retrieval approach to open-format legal question answering.
Presents a multilingual corpus of potentially unfair online terms-of-service clauses.
Wachter, Mittelstadt and Russell examine tensions between statistical measures of fairness and EU nondiscrimination law.
The 2020 preprint and 2021 journal article are grouped.
Calo and Citron examine legitimacy and structural concerns raised by automation in administrative agencies.
Lemley and Casey argue for fair-use treatment of some machine-learning training uses.
Veale and Zuiderveen Borgesius analyse the European Commission’s 2021 draft AI Act, including risk categories, product-safety structures, enforcement and harmonisation.
The arXiv preprint uses the shorter title. This is historical analysis of the 2021 proposal; consult current legislation separately.
Calo critiques reliance on voluntary principles and other soft-law approaches to AI governance.
Coglianese considers the relationship between automated government decision making and administrative-law values.
Cyphert examines professional and ethical issues raised by GPT-3 in legal practice.
Chalkidis and colleagues compare approaches to adapting BERT to legal texts and introduce LEGAL-BERT models for legal-language research.
Hellman examines measures of algorithmic fairness and discrimination law.
Gillotte examines copyright questions concerning AI training and generated artwork.
Huq evaluates arguments for a right to human rather than machine decision making.
Selbst and colleagues examine how abstraction in machine-learning design can overlook social context, and propose broader approaches to fairness, justice and due process.
Lemley and Casey examine legal remedies for harms involving autonomous machines.
Lamo and Calo examine legal responses to automated speech and bots.
Sarch and Abbott examine criminal and civil liability where AI systems cause harm.
Burk examines automated copyright enforcement and fair-use decision making.
Blass examines machine-learning advertising and employment discrimination.
Wachter and Mittelstadt propose protections for people affected by high-risk inferences drawn from personal data.
Page range checked against the published Columbia Business Law Review article; an Oxford repository citation gives a different range.
Kleinberg and colleagues use bail decisions to examine the relationship between machine predictions and human decisions, addressing selective outcome data and competing policy objectives.
The 2017 NBER working paper and 2018 journal article are grouped. The linked NBER record identifies the published version and offers the working paper.
Wachter, Mittelstadt and Russell propose counterfactual explanations to help people understand, contest and seek changes to automated decisions, examining their relationship to the GDPR.
Read open version · HJLT 31(2):841 (2018) · Repository version (first posted 2017)
The 2017 preprint and 2018 law-review article are grouped as one work. This is historical scholarship on the GDPR.
Doshi-Velez and colleagues examine legal contexts requiring explanations and the technical considerations involved in applying explanation-based accountability to AI systems.
Read open version · arXiv:1711.01134
First repository posting shown; revised December 20, 2019. A later journal publication was not established in this review.
Wachter, Mittelstadt and Floridi argue that the GDPR’s information and automated-decision provisions offer a narrower protection than a general right to explanations of individual decisions.
A contribution to the 2017 scholarly debate. Its thesis is attributed to the authors; later legislation and case law require separate review.
Joh examines private security robots, artificial intelligence and the use of deadly force.
Calo surveys policy questions arising from artificial intelligence.
Kingston examines criminal responsibility, negligence, product classification and warranties for AI systems, using autonomous vehicles as a starting point.
Published in 2016; the author’s repository copy was posted in 2018. These dates are kept distinct. The analysis is historical.
Aletras, Tsarapatsanis, Preoţiuc-Pietro and Lampos study prediction of European Court of Human Rights case outcomes using textual features from published case material.
Published article, with a lawful open copy linked from the university record. Retrospective prediction is the paper’s research setting.
Abbott argues for recognizing computer-generated inventions in patent law.
View source record · SSRN:2727884
Barocas and Selbst examine how data mining can reproduce disadvantage and how those mechanisms interact with U.S. employment-discrimination law.
The 2014 working-paper posting and 2016 law-review article are grouped as one work.
Calo draws on cyberlaw scholarship to examine legal questions posed by robotics.
Bench-Capon and colleagues trace the development of AI and law through commentaries on fifty papers from the first twenty-five years of ICAIL.
Open university abstract and bibliographic record linked; publisher full text requires subscription. An accessible full-text copy was not verified in this review.
Calo examines privacy issues raised by artificial intelligence.