Against Explainable Artificial Intelligence In Law: Why Justifiable Ai Matters. A Credit Scoring Example
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.07452v1
- Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2026 17:45:42 GMT
- Title: Against Explainable Artificial Intelligence In Law: Why Justifiable Ai Matters. A Credit Scoring Example
- Abstract summary: We review the relevant EU legal background and integrate this review with insights from technical sciences to interpret relevant legal provisions.<n>We reject the narrow interpretations of the right to explanation and suggest the broad one.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Artificial intelligence-based solutions offer new efficiency-increasing possibilities in many applications, including credit scoring. Yet, the increasing sophistication of machine-learning models in use raises concerns regarding many of their aspects, explainability notwithstanding. We review the relevant EU legal background and integrate this review with insights from technical sciences to interpret relevant legal provisions in the light of technological possibilities. We reject the narrow interpretations of the right to explanation and suggest the broad one, which encompasses not only a technical explanations but also a legal justification as the only one that allows to safeguard the creditors rights in an operative manner.
Related papers
- Bridging Legal Interpretation and Formal Logic: Faithfulness, Assumption, and the Future of AI Legal Reasoning [3.093890460224435]
The growing adoption of large language models in legal practice brings both significant promise and serious risk.<n>This proposal presents a neuro-symbolic approach to legal AI that combines the expressive power of large language models with the rigor of formal verification.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-13T19:11:09Z) - WisdomInterrogatory (LuWen): An Open-Source Legal Large Language Model Technical Report [55.27414605169639]
We present WisdomInterrogatory (LuWen), an open-source Chinese legal language model built upon the Baichuan foundation model.<n>We evaluate LuWen on five representative legal tasks spanning both prediction and generation settings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-08T06:59:07Z) - 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) - Argumentation-Based Explainability for Legal AI: Comparative and Regulatory Perspectives [0.9668407688201359]
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly deployed in legal contexts.<n>The so-called black box problem'' undermines legitimacy of automated decision-making.<n>XAI has proposed a variety of methods to enhance transparency.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-13T07:19:15Z) - GLARE: Agentic Reasoning for Legal Judgment Prediction [60.13483016810707]
Legal judgment prediction (LJP) has become increasingly important in the legal field.<n>Existing large language models (LLMs) have significant problems of insufficient reasoning due to a lack of legal knowledge.<n>We introduce GLARE, an agentic legal reasoning framework that dynamically acquires key legal knowledge by invoking different modules.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-22T13:38:12Z) - The explanation dialogues: an expert focus study to understand requirements towards explanations within the GDPR [47.06917254695738]
We present the Explanation Dialogues, an expert focus study to uncover the expectations, reasoning, and understanding of legal experts and practitioners towards XAI.<n>The study consists of an online questionnaire and follow-up interviews, and is centered around a use-case in the credit domain.<n>We find that the presented explanations are hard to understand and lack information, and discuss issues that can arise from the different interests of the data controller and subject.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-09T15:50:02Z) - Towards Supporting Legal Argumentation with NLP: Is More Data Really All You Need? [1.6311895940869516]
Legal reasoning and argumentation justifying decisions in cases has always been central to AI & Law.
Recent developments in legal NLP have increasingly focused on statistically classifying legal conclusions from text.
This paper reviews both traditional symbolic works in AI & Law and recent advances in legal NLP.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-16T15:15:44Z) - Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome.
Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations.
We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z) - Authorized and Unauthorized Practices of Law: The Role of Autonomous
Levels of AI Legal Reasoning [0.0]
The legal field has sought to define Authorized Practices of Law (APL) versus Unauthorized Practices of Law (UPL)
This paper explores a newly derived instrumental grid depicting the key characteristics underlying APL and UPL as they apply to the AILR autonomous levels.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-08-19T18:35:58Z) - How Does NLP Benefit Legal System: A Summary of Legal Artificial
Intelligence [81.04070052740596]
Legal Artificial Intelligence (LegalAI) focuses on applying the technology of artificial intelligence, especially natural language processing, to benefit tasks in the legal domain.
This paper introduces the history, the current state, and the future directions of research in LegalAI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-25T14:45:15Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.