2° Edition of the workshop aims at fostering discussion about the state of the art on regulations for AI and how to use AI for regulations 

(and more generally in the legal domain). 

Which are the strong and weak points in using them? They are transparent, accurate, trustable; at all or with which assumptions?

The European Union was one of the first major jurisdictions to introduce a comprehensive legislation for AI, and it is expected that many more jurisdictions will follow the EU lead. 

The IT market is a global and transnational market, where one system is developed in a country and deployed in another, and accessed in a third one. Accordingly, in this trans-jurisdictional context the actual AI Act will have an impact not only in the European market but also in the worldwide market. Other countries will regulate the AI systems, this implies that harmonization of these norms will be desirable for the market and the enterprises in the field, and will be inevitable the impact of the first strong restrictive regulations of some countries, on the following regulations and on the economy on the global market.

Given the complexity of modern AI systems, it is likely that solutions to certify the compliance of AI tools will be AI systems themselves. Also, with the rapid growth of AI solutions more AI tools will be used in the Law and Legal professions. Thus, AI tools can prove beneficial in the legal domain. The judicial and legal domain are deemed as sensitive and high risk domains. Accordingly, what are the AI tools beneficial to the legal domain? What are the areas of legal domain where AI tools can be successful, and if they need to be certified against AI regulation, how can we certify these AI systems?

For any information write at: chairs.clairvoyant@gmail.com