Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 article

The evolution of scientific evidence between artificial intelligence and legal validity

1Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
2Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : it. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: The use of AI is transforming the production and legal validity of scientific evidence in the forensic context, raising critical questions regarding admissibility in court. While traditional forms of scientific evidence rely on methodologies already validated and accepted by the scientific community, AI systems introduce unprecedented challenges in terms of explainability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a search on PubMed using the keywords "artificial intelligence scientific proof" over the past 10 years. Applying the relevant filters, we obtained 243 results. The aim of this research is to analyze the reliability of AI in judicial proceedings and the potential admissibility of scientific evidence, by comparing major legal systems. This study examines the impact of AI with particular focus on compliance standards. For completeness, we also carried out additional hand-searching. RESULTS: The investigation reveals that the use of AI in the forensic field offers undeniable advantages. However, there are still several issues to address, primarily associated with the "black box" nature of AI. In this international context, there are also regulatory gaps between the EU system and the US approach, which is already utilizing such systems with flexible but controversial criteria. DISCUSSION: The integration of AI into legal processes requires a balance between innovation and procedural safeguards. The U.S. Daubert Standard provides a framework for assessing the scientific reliability of algorithmic evidence but needs adaptation to address the challenges posed by AI. The future challenge lies in reconciling technological advancement with the principles of procedural fairness, ensuring that AI does not become an "incontestable" form of evidence due to its complex nature.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
The evolution of scientific evidence between artificial intelligence and legal validity
Date Crossref
01/05/2026
Éditeur
Elsevier BV
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in LawLaw, AI, and Intellectual Property

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.