类案的识别与判断——浅析相似性评价

类案同判的前提是识别与判断类案.类案的实质性判断分两步走,一是相似相关性的识别,即在待决案件与参考案例之间提取事实要素,摘取出指向裁决终局的关键性事实;二是决定相似性的判断,即关键性事实所指向的背后的法益保护评价.判断待决案件与参考案例之间的相同点和不同点哪个更为重要,进而可以决定援引参考案例裁判思路的可能性.

智慧司法时代的“类案”何以裁断——基于类比论证型式的分析

同案同判的关键是相似性判断的证成,这需要借助类比论证来实现。运用论证型式解析类案判断,相似性判断可被分解为数量相似性、相关相似性和决定相似性,分别对应“哪里相似”“何种相似”“为何相似”的批判性问题。人工智能技术可通过量化计算的方式对案例的相似度进行精确表达,在一定程度上实现类案的智能推送。而无论是相关相似性还是决定相似性的判断,均需借助法官的价值判断来完成。对此,法律人工智能将价值判断转化为经验判断,能够为法官的类案判断提供参考。但是,其无法代替法官选择类案判断的实质标准。因此,案例系统作为智能工具,在辅助法官进行类案判断时有明确的限度,不能依此消除合理的差异化判决。

AGGREGATION OF FUZZY OPINIONS UNDER GROUP DECISION-MAKING BASED ON SIMILARITY AND DISTANCE

In this article, a new method for aggregating fuzzy individual opinions into a group consensus opinion is proposed. To obtain the aggregation weights of each individual opinion, a consistency index of each expert with the other experts is introduced based on similarity and distance. The importance of each expert is also taken into consideration in the process of aggregation. Finally, a numerical example is presented to illustrate the efficiency of the procedure.