Related papers: Alignment as Jurisprudence

Alignment as Jurisprudence

URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.08416v1
Date: Fri, 08 May 2026 19:22:11 GMT
Title: Alignment as Jurisprudence
Abstract summary: The study of how judges should properly decide cases and alignment, the science of getting AI models to conform to human values, share a fundamental structure.<n>This essay puts the two fields directly into conversation.<n>It illustrates the value of a more sophisticated legally-inspired approach to the interplay of rules and cases in finetuning alignment.
Score: 0.0
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Abstract: Jurisprudence, the study of how judges should properly decide cases, and alignment, the science of getting AI models to conform to human values, share a fundamental structure. These seemingly distant fields both seek to predict and shape how decisions by powerful actors, in one case judges and in the other increasingly powerful artificial intelligences, will be made in the unknown future. And they use similar tools of the specification and interpretation of language to try to accomplish those goals. The great debates of jurisprudence, about what the law is and what it should be, can provide insight into alignment, and lessons from what does and does not work in alignment can help make progress in jurisprudence. This essay puts the two fields directly into conversation. Drawing on leading accounts of jurisprudence, particularly Dworkin's principle-oriented interpretivism and Sunstein's positivist account of law as analogical reasoning, and on cutting-edge alignment approaches, namely Constitutional AI and case-based reasoning, it illustrates the value of a more sophisticated legally-inspired approach to the interplay of rules and cases in finetuning alignment and points to ways that AI can provide a better understanding of how the law works and how it can be improved by the introduction of AI. AI systems and the law should operate to empower people to act in the world, helping to expand their capabilities and the extent to which they are able to achieve their goals. As AI continues to improve in capacity, and as the constraints that legal theory places on human judges seem be coming undone, the conversation between these two fields will become increasingly essential and may help point to a better version of both.

Related papers

Security, privacy, and agentic AI in a regulatory view: From definitions and distinctions to provisions and reflections [53.468443050795344]
The rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has led to a dynamic regulatory landscape.<n>As AI paradigms shift towards greater autonomy, specifically in the form of agentic AI, it becomes increasingly challenging to articulate regulatory stipulations.<n>This paper reviews the evolving European Union (EU) AI regulatory provisions via analyzing 24 relevant documents published between 2024 and 2025.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-19T13:50:52Z)
LegalOne: A Family of Foundation Models for Reliable Legal Reasoning [54.57434222018289]
We present LegalOne, a family of foundational models specifically tailored for the Chinese legal domain.<n>LegalOne is developed through a comprehensive three-phase pipeline designed to master legal reasoning.<n>We publicly release the LegalOne weights and the LegalKit evaluation framework to advance the field of Legal AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-31T10:18:32Z)
RLJP: Legal Judgment Prediction via First-Order Logic Rule-enhanced with Large Language Models [58.69183479148083]
Legal Judgment Prediction (LJP) is a pivotal task in legal AI.<n>Existing LJP models integrate judicial precedents and legal knowledge for high performance.<n>But they neglect legal reasoning logic, a critical component of legal judgments requiring rigorous logical analysis.<n>This paper proposes a rule-enhanced legal judgment prediction framework based on first-order logic (FOL) formalism and comparative learning (CL)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-27T14:50:21Z)
Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
Report of the 1st Workshop on Generative AI and Law [78.62063815165968]
This report presents the takeaways of the inaugural Workshop on Generative AI and Law (GenLaw) A cross-disciplinary group of practitioners and scholars from computer science and law convened to discuss the technical, doctrinal, and policy challenges presented by law for Generative AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-11T04:13:37Z)
AI Ethics and Ordoliberalism 2.0: Towards A 'Digital Bill of Rights' [0.0]
This article analyzes AI ethics from a distinct business ethics perspective, i.e., 'ordoliberalism 2.0' It argues that the ongoing discourse on (generative) AI relies too much on corporate self-regulation and voluntary codes of conduct. The paper suggests merging already existing AI guidelines with an ordoliberal-inspired regulatory and competition policy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-27T10:26:12Z)
Law Informs Code: A Legal Informatics Approach to Aligning Artificial Intelligence with Humans [0.0]
Law-making and legal interpretation form a computational engine that converts opaque human values into legible directives. "Law Informs Code" is the research agenda capturing complex computational legal processes, and embedding them in AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-09-14T00:49:09Z)
Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
AI and Legal Argumentation: Aligning the Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
Legal argumentation is a vital cornerstone of justice, underpinning an adversarial form of law. Extensive research has attempted to augment or undertake legal argumentation via the use of computer-based automation including Artificial Intelligence (AI) An innovative meta-approach is proposed to apply the Levels of Autonomy (LoA) of AI Legal Reasoning to the maturation of AI and Legal Argumentation (AILA)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-09-11T22:05:40Z)
An Impact Model of AI on the Principles of Justice: Encompassing the Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
It is argued that the infusion of AI into existing and future legal activities and the judicial structure needs to be undertaken by mindfully observing an alignment with the core principles of justice. By examining the principles of justice across the Levels of Autonomy (LoA) of AI Legal Reasoning, the case is made that there is an ongoing tension underlying the efforts to develop and deploy AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-08-26T22:56:41Z)
An Ontological AI-and-Law Framework for the Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
A framework is proposed that seeks to identify and establish a set of robust autonomous levels articulating the realm of Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning. A set of seven levels of autonomy for AI and Legal Reasoning are meticulously proffered and mindfully discussed.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-08-04T16:12:30Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.