Introduction Chapter 1 Status Quo of Trial Efficiency and Quality in China』s Civil Litigation 1.1 Status Quo of Trial Efficiency and Quality in China 1.1.1 Evaluation of Trial Efficiency 1.1.2 Evaluation Index of Trial Quality of Courts in China 1.2 Weights Setting of Judges』 Performance Assessment Indicators 1.3 Insufficient Trial Resources in Local Courts 1.3.1 Dramatically Increased Cases but Limited Quota Judges 1.3.2 Great Pressure on Judges 1.3.3 AI Making Up for the Shortage of Judicial Assistants 1.4 Loopholes of Internal Trial Supervision Brought by Judicial Accountability System 1.4.1 Court Leading Cadres Being Hesitant or Unwilling to Supervise 1.4.2 Defects of the New Case Assignment System 1.4.3 Other Dilemmas 1.5 Trialquality Ignorance of the Smart Court Construction in the Early Stage 1.5.1 Construction and Development History of Smart Courts 1.5.2 Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Smart Courts 1.5.3 The Goal Pursuit in the Early Stage of Smart Courts: Efficiency Orientation 1.6 Distrust on AI Participating in Trial: Based on a Questionnaire 1.6.1 Overview Information of Respondents and Investigation Methodology of the Questionnaire 1.6.2 Survey Results and Data Analysis 1.7 Conclusion Chapter 2 Legal Reasoning and the Development of Court Intelligent Auxiliary Case Handling System 2.1 Development Goal: Promoting Trial Quality and Further Improving Trial Efficiency 2.1.1 General Goal of Trial Quality: Treating Similar Cases Alike 2.1.2 Subgoal 1: to Solve the Law Application Justification Problems 2.1.3 Subgoal 2: to Solve the Problem of Unifying「 Similar Cases」 Standard 2.1.4 Subgoal 3: to Solve the Problem in the Legal Reasoning Process 2.1.5 Other Subgoals 2.2 Selection of Research and Development Domain 2.3 Jurisprudence Basis and Model of Legal Reasoning 2.3.1 Deduction: RuleBased Reasoning 2.3.2 Nonmonotonic Logic and Defeasible Reasoning Model 2.3.3 Analogy: CaseBased Reasoning and KnowledgeBased Reasoning 2.3.4 Cooperative Paradigm Reasoning Model— Chinese Choice 2.4 Building the Intelligent Auxiliary Case Handling System for Road Traffic Accident Compensation Disputes 2.4.1 Building RuleBased Reasoning System 2.4.2 Building KnowledgeBased Reasoning Model 2.4.3 Establishment of Defeasible Reasoning Model 2.4.4 Construction of CaseBased Reasoning Model 2.4.5 Establishment of Intelligent Auxiliary Case Handling System 2.5 Conclusion Chapter 3 Law Expectation and Due Process: From Perspective of Civil Litigation 3.1 Absence of Law Causing Legal Expectation of Intelligent Trial Failed 3.2 Embedding the Intelligent Auxiliar 3.3.1 Substituting the Judge to Make Adjudication in Summary Procedure 3.3.2 Assisting the Judge to Make Adjudication in Formal Procedure 3.3.3 Compulsory Application of the IACHS in the First Instance Trial in the Selected Domain 3.3.4 Trial Responsibility Allocation 3.3.5 Application of IACHS in Appeal and Retrial Procedure 3.4 Dual Shaping of Due Process on the IACHS: Procedural Legitimacy and Substantive Legitimacy 3.4.1 Procedure Subjects: Role Separation 3.4.2 Subject』s Behavior: Time Requirements and Communication Rules 3.4.3 Procedure Result: Judgment Acceptability 3.5 Conclusion Findings and Forward: the Judicial World of HumanMachine Collaboration Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3
[