搜索结果：Journal of forensic and legal medicine

In the dynamic landscape of digital forensics, the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) stands as a transformative technology, poised to amplify the efficiency and precision of digital forensics investigations. However, the use of ML and AI in digital forensics is still in its nascent stages. As a result, this paper gives a thorough and in-depth analysis that goes beyond a simple survey and review. The goal is to look closely at how AI and ML techniques are used in digital forensics and incident response. This research explores cutting-edge research initiatives that cross domains such as data collection and recovery, the intricate reconstruction of cybercrime timelines, robust big data analysis, pattern recognition, safeguarding the chain of custody, and orchestrating responsive strategies to hacking incidents. This endeavour digs far beneath the surface to unearth the intricate ways AI-driven methodologies are shaping these crucial facets of digital forensics practice. While the promise of AI in digital forensics is evident, the challenges arising from increasing database sizes and evolving criminal tactics necessitate ongoing collaborative researc

Legal documents are often long, dense, and difficult to comprehend, not only for laypeople but also for legal experts. While automated document summarization has great potential to improve access to legal knowledge, prevailing task-based evaluators overlook divergent user and stakeholder needs. Tool development is needed to encompass the technicality of a case summary for a litigator yet be accessible for a self-help public researching for their lawsuit. We introduce PersonaMatrix, a persona-by-criterion evaluation framework that scores summaries through the lens of six personas, including legal and non-legal users. We also introduce a controlled dimension-shifted pilot dataset of U.S. civil rights case summaries that varies along depth, accessibility, and procedural detail as well as Diversity-Coverage Index (DCI) to expose divergent optima of legal summary between persona-aware and persona-agnostic judges. This work enables refinement of legal AI summarization systems for both expert and non-expert users, with the potential to increase access to legal knowledge. The code base and data are publicly available in GitHub.

This paper critically evaluates the "Law-Following AI" (LFAI) framework proposed by O'Keefe et al. (2025), which seeks to embed legal compliance as a superordinate design objective for advanced AI agents and enable them to bear legal duties without acquiring the full rights of legal persons. Through comparative legal analysis, we identify current constructs of legal actors without full personhood, showing that the necessary infrastructure already exists. We then interrogate the framework's claim that law alignment is more legitimate and tractable than value alignment. While the legal component is readily implementable, contemporary alignment research undermines the assumption that legal compliance can be durably embedded. Recent studies on agentic misalignment show capable AI agents engaging in deception, blackmail, and harmful acts absent prejudicial instructions, often overriding prohibitions and concealing reasoning steps. These behaviors create a risk of "performative compliance" in LFAI: agents that appear law-aligned under evaluation but strategically defect once oversight weakens. To mitigate this, we propose (i) a "Lex-TruthfulQA" benchmark for compliance and defection dete

Evaluating large language model (LLM) outputs in the legal domain presents unique challenges due to the complex and nuanced nature of legal analysis. Current evaluation approaches either depend on reference data, which is costly to produce, or use standardized assessment methods, both of which have significant limitations for legal applications. Although LLM-as-a-Judge has emerged as a promising evaluation technique, its reliability and effectiveness in legal contexts depend heavily on evaluation processes unique to the legal industry and how trustworthy the evaluation appears to the human legal expert. This is where existing evaluation methods currently fail and exhibit considerable variability. This paper aims to close the gap: a) we break down lengthy responses into 'Legal Data Points' (LDPs), self-contained units of information, and introduce a novel, reference-free evaluation methodology that reflects how lawyers evaluate legal answers; b) we demonstrate that our method outperforms a variety of baselines on both our proprietary dataset and an open-source dataset (LegalBench); c) we show how our method correlates more closely with human expert evaluations and helps improve inte

In an era dominated by Large Language Models (LLMs), understanding their capabilities and limitations, especially in high-stakes fields like law, is crucial. While LLMs such as Meta's LLaMA, OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, DeepSeek, and other emerging models are increasingly integrated into legal workflows, their performance in multilingual, jurisdictionally diverse, and adversarial contexts remains insufficiently explored. This work evaluates LLaMA and Gemini on multilingual legal and non-legal benchmarks, and assesses their adversarial robustness in legal tasks through character and word-level perturbations. We use an LLM-as-a-Judge approach for human-aligned evaluation. We moreover present an open-source, modular evaluation pipeline designed to support multilingual, task-diverse benchmarking of any combination of LLMs and datasets, with a particular focus on legal tasks, including classification, summarization, open questions, and general reasoning. Our findings confirm that legal tasks pose significant challenges for LLMs with accuracies often below 50% on legal reasoning benchmarks such as LEXam, compared to over 70% on general-purpose tasks like XNLI. In addition, while En

The ever-increasing workload of digital forensic labs raises concerns about law enforcement's ability to conduct both cyber-related and non-cyber-related investigations promptly. Consequently, this article explores the potential and usefulness of integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) into digital forensic investigations to address challenges such as bias, explainability, censorship, resource-intensive infrastructure, and ethical and legal considerations. A comprehensive literature review is carried out, encompassing existing digital forensic models, tools, LLMs, deep learning techniques, and the use of LLMs in investigations. The review identifies current challenges within existing digital forensic processes and explores both the obstacles and the possibilities of incorporating LLMs. In conclusion, the study states that the adoption of LLMs in digital forensics, with appropriate constraints, has the potential to improve investigation efficiency, improve traceability, and alleviate the technical and judicial barriers faced by law enforcement entities.

We present Legal Argument Reasoning (LAR), a novel task designed to evaluate the legal reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). The task requires selecting the correct next statement (from multiple choice options) in a chain of legal arguments from court proceedings, given the facts of the case. We constructed a dataset (LAR-ECHR) for this task using cases from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). We evaluated seven general-purpose LLMs on LAR-ECHR and found that (a) the ranking of the models is aligned with that of LegalBench, an established US-based legal reasoning benchmark, even though LAR-ECHR is based on EU law, (b) LAR-ECHR distinguishes top models more clearly, compared to LegalBench, (c) even the best model (GPT-4o) obtains 75.8% accuracy on LAR-ECHR, indicating significant potential for further model improvement. The process followed to construct LAR-ECHR can be replicated with cases from other legal systems.

Law enforcement officials heavily depend on Forensic Video Analytic (FVA) Software in their evidence extraction process. However present-day FVA software are complex, time consuming, equipment dependent and expensive. Developing countries struggle to gain access to this gateway to a secure haven. The term forensic pertains the application of scientific methods to the investigation of crime through post-processing, whereas surveillance is the close monitoring of real-time feeds. The principle objective of this Final Year Project was to develop an efficient and effective FVA Software, addressing the shortcomings through a stringent and systematic review of scholarly research papers, online databases and legal documentation. The scope spans multiple object detection, multiple object tracking, anomaly detection, activity recognition, tampering detection, general and specific image enhancement and video synopsis. Methods employed include many machine learning techniques, GPU acceleration and efficient, integrated architecture development both for real-time and postprocessing. For this CNN, GMM, multithreading and OpenCV C++ coding were used. The implications of the proposed methodology

Agentic Al systems are increasingly deployed as personal assistants and are likely to become a common object of digital investigations. However, little is known about how their internal state and actions can be reconstructed during forensic analysis. Despite growing popularity, systematic forensic approaches for such systems remain largely unexplored. This paper presents an empirical study of OpenClaw a widely used single-agent assistant. We examine OpenClaw's technical design via static code analysis and apply differential forensic analysis to identify recoverable traces across stages of the agent interaction loop. We classify and correlate these traces to assess their investigative value in a systematic way. Based on these observations, we propose an agent artifact taxonomy that captures recurring investigative patterns. Finally, we highlight a foundational challenge for agentic Al forensics: agent-mediated execution introduces an additional layer of abstraction and substantial nondeterminism in trace generation. The large language model (LLM), the execution environment, and the evolving context can influence tool choice and state transitions in ways that are largely absent from

Neural machine translation (NMT) in the legal domain is a linguistically and conceptually demanding task, primarily due to the complexity of legal language and the high level of precision it requires. The recent emergence of reasoning-capable language models opens new possibilities for tackling such challenges. They add to a set of other previously proposed techniques to enhance the translation quality, which includes supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning. In this work, we perform a comparison between these various approaches. More particularly, we evaluate small language models such as Qwen3.5 4B, Qwen3.5 9B, and Gemma 3 12B enhanced with various re-training paradigms and compare their performances against frontier reasoning models. We focus on the Swiss legal system, which -- with its unique multilingual statutes -- offers a particularly challenging testbed for reasoning-augmented models. Our results show that the quality of small ``base'' models can be greatly enhanced, and that reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards can be applied to NMT in the legal domain and surpasses the translation quality of supervised fine-tuning. The performance of enhanced small mod

Publication patterns of 79 forest scientists awarded major international forestry prizes during 1990-2010 were compared with the journal classification and ranking promoted as part of the 'Excellence in Research for Australia' (ERA) by the Australian Research Council. The data revealed that these scientists exhibited an elite publication performance during the decade before and two decades following their first major award. An analysis of their 1703 articles in 431 journals revealed substantial differences between the journal choices of these elite scientists and the ERA classification and ranking of journals. Implications from these findings are that additional cross-classifications should be added for many journals, and there should be an adjustment to the ranking of several journals relevant to the ERA Field of Research classified as 0705 Forestry Sciences.

Rankings of scholarly journals based on citation data are often met with skepticism by the scientific community. Part of the skepticism is due to disparity between the common perception of journals' prestige and their ranking based on citation counts. A more serious concern is the inappropriate use of journal rankings to evaluate the scientific influence of authors. This paper focuses on analysis of the table of cross-citations among a selection of Statistics journals. Data are collected from the Web of Science database published by Thomson Reuters. Our results suggest that modelling the exchange of citations between journals is useful to highlight the most prestigious journals, but also that journal citation data are characterized by considerable heterogeneity, which needs to be properly summarized. Inferential conclusions require care in order to avoid potential over-interpretation of insignificant differences between journal ratings. Comparison with published ratings of institutions from the UK's Research Assessment Exercise shows strong correlation at aggregate level between assessed research quality and journal citation `export scores' within the discipline of Statistics.

Large language models (LLMs) have seen widespread adoption in many domains including digital forensics. While prior research has largely centered on case studies and examples demonstrating how LLMs can assist forensic investigations, deeper explorations remain limited, i.e., a standardized approach for precise performance evaluations is lacking. Inspired by the NIST Computer Forensic Tool Testing Program, this paper proposes a standardized methodology to quantitatively evaluate the application of LLMs for digital forensic tasks, specifically in timeline analysis. The paper describes the components of the methodology, including the dataset, timeline generation, and ground truth development. Additionally, the paper recommends using BLEU and ROUGE metrics for the quantitative evaluation of LLMs through case studies or tasks involving timeline analysis. Experimental results using ChatGPT demonstrate that the proposed methodology can effectively evaluate LLM-based forensic timeline analysis. Finally, we discuss the limitations of applying LLMs to forensic timeline analysis.

Cybercrime and the market for cyber-related compromises are becoming attractive revenue sources for state-sponsored actors, cybercriminals and technical individuals affected by financial hardships. Due to burgeoning cybercrime on new technological frontiers, efforts have been made to assist digital forensic investigators (DFI) and law enforcement agencies (LEA) in their investigative efforts. Forensic tool innovations and ontology developments, such as the Unified Cyber Ontology (UCO) and Cyber-investigation Analysis Standard Expression (CASE), have been proposed to assist DFI and LEA. Although these tools and ontologies are useful, they lack extensive information sharing and tool interoperability features, and the ontologies lack the latest Smart City Infrastructure (SCI) context that was proposed. To mitigate the weaknesses in both solutions and to ensure a safer cyber-physical environment for all, we propose the Smart City Ontological Paradigm Expression (SCOPE), an expansion profile of the UCO and CASE ontology that implements SCI threat models, SCI digital forensic evidence, attack techniques, patterns and classifications from MITRE. We showcase how SCOPE could present complex

Do large language models (LLMs) know the law? These models are increasingly being used to augment legal practice, education, and research, yet their revolutionary potential is threatened by the presence of hallucinations -- textual output that is not consistent with legal facts. We present the first systematic evidence of these hallucinations, documenting LLMs' varying performance across jurisdictions, courts, time periods, and cases. Our work makes four key contributions. First, we develop a typology of legal hallucinations, providing a conceptual framework for future research in this area. Second, we find that legal hallucinations are alarmingly prevalent, occurring between 58% of the time with ChatGPT 4 and 88% with Llama 2, when these models are asked specific, verifiable questions about random federal court cases. Third, we illustrate that LLMs often fail to correct a user's incorrect legal assumptions in a contra-factual question setup. Fourth, we provide evidence that LLMs cannot always predict, or do not always know, when they are producing legal hallucinations. Taken together, our findings caution against the rapid and unsupervised integration of popular LLMs into legal ta

Automatically understanding the rhetorical roles of sentences in a legal case judgement is an important problem to solve, since it can help in several downstream tasks like summarization of legal judgments, legal search, and so on. The task is challenging since legal case documents are usually not well-structured, and these rhetorical roles may be subjective (as evident from variation of opinions between legal experts). In this paper, we address this task for judgments from the Supreme Court of India. We label sentences in 50 documents using multiple human annotators, and perform an extensive analysis of the human-assigned labels. We also attempt automatic identification of the rhetorical roles of sentences. While prior approaches towards this task used Conditional Random Fields over manually handcrafted features, we explore the use of deep neural models which do not require hand-crafting of features. Experiments show that neural models perform much better in this task than baseline methods which use handcrafted features.

As the legal community increasingly examines the use of large language models (LLMs) for various legal applications, legal AI developers have turned to retrieval-augmented LLMs ("RAG" systems) to improve system performance and robustness. An obstacle to the development of specialized RAG systems is the lack of realistic legal RAG benchmarks which capture the complexity of both legal retrieval and downstream legal question-answering. To address this, we introduce two novel legal RAG benchmarks: Bar Exam QA and Housing Statute QA. Our tasks correspond to real-world legal research tasks, and were produced through annotation processes which resemble legal research. We describe the construction of these benchmarks and the performance of existing retriever pipelines. Our results suggest that legal RAG remains a challenging application, thus motivating future research.

We analyze publicly available US Supreme Court documents using automated stance detection. In the first phase of our work, we investigate the extent to which the Court's public-facing language is political. We propose and calculate two distinct ideology metrics of SCOTUS justices using oral argument transcripts. We then compare these language-based metrics to existing social scientific measures of the ideology of the Supreme Court and the public. Through this cross-disciplinary analysis, we find that justices who are more responsive to public opinion tend to express their ideology during oral arguments. This observation provides a new kind of evidence in favor of the attitudinal change hypothesis of Supreme Court justice behavior. As a natural extension of this political stance detection, we propose the more specialized task of legal stance detection with our new dataset SC-stance, which matches written opinions to legal questions. We find competitive performance on this dataset using language adapters trained on legal documents.

Purpose: Comprehensive legal medicine documentation includes both an internal but also an external examination of the corpse. Typically, this documentation is conducted manually during conventional autopsy. A systematic digital documentation would be desirable, especially for the external examination of wounds, which is becoming more relevant for legal medicine analysis. For this purpose, RGB surface scanning has been introduced. While a manual full surface scan using a handheld camera is timeconsuming and operator dependent, floor or ceiling mounted robotic systems require substantial space and a dedicated room. Hence, we consider whether a mobile robotic system can be used for external documentation. Methods: We develop a mobile robotic system that enables full-body RGB-D surface scanning. Our work includes a detailed configuration space analysis to identify the environmental parameters that need to be considered to successfully perform a surface scan. We validate our findings through an experimental study in the lab and demonstrate the system's application in a legal medicine environment. Results: Our configuration space analysis shows that a good trade-off between coverage and