The law is harsh, but it is the law: so says the AI judge in a recent study from the University of Chicago Law School. The study analysed the differences between AI and human legal decision-making, and found that human judges were significantly influenced by non-legal and emotional factors, unlike OpenAI’s GPT-40.

The findings raise questions on how closely AI can mirror the judgement of humans, particularly in settings such as the legal system, where an emotional intelligence and nuance is needed. Even as models continue to become faster and stronger, this empathy gap could hinder AI’s potential.

The original study set out to understand how federal judges and law students made legal decisions. Participants reviewed the simulated appeals of defendants involved in international war crimes. Defendants were shown to be sympathetic and unsympathetic, and the judges and students were also given different levels of relevant and irrelevant information.

Read more at Tech.co