By: Nathaniel Chaij, Senior Articles Editor          

Artificial intelligence (AI) has swiftly become a household discussion in recent years as it shakes up industries from education to international arbitration. AI has already begun to help organizations streamline their operations, reduce costs, and make better decisions. In the last ten years, AI has seen exponential growth in its technical capabilities. The future seems brighter than can be imagined, and the present is full of incredible opportunities for arbitrators to utilize AI as a tool. This article will explore the present and potential future impacts of AI and consider practices that organizations may adopt when using AI in arbitration.

The first, and most common, use of AI in arbitration is E-discovery. E-discovery allows organizations to find relevant parts from a variety of documents by using AI to quickly search documents. Usually, E-discovery is faster, cheaper, and more accurate than having teams of lawyers or paralegals sift through the documents themselves. Further, some organizations have begun to use AI in the selection of arbitrators, since party-appointed arbitrators carry the risk of bringing inherent biases into the proceedings. Quickly transcribing and translating documents in international proceedings, AI allows for a more efficient way to work when there are language barriers.           

All these benefits aside, AI is not a perfect tool. There are concerns within the arbitration sector about the use of AI. There have already been questions about the potential biases that are unintentionally written into the foundational algorithm of the AI. Due to this, there are greater and greater calls for algorithmic transparency, which would allow AIs to be scrutinized by relevant parties and courts to the same degree that human arbitrators might be. While these risks are potentials to consider for the future, the most common uses of AI are still within the realms of research and data management rather than that of giving arbitral awards.

Even though there have been many foreign states that have remained silent about the use of AI in arbitral situations, there has been a growing shift in some foreign states that have codified the idea that humans must be the ones that do arbitration. France, as well as some African states, have written that arbitrators must be natural persons, which is read to mean human. Even though the main usage of AI is heavily data-focused, states are beginning to realize that, if AI continues to evolve at the rate that it is, issues may arise where AIs begin to be used to give arbitral awards in lieu of arbitral panels. This potential lies in the future and, as such, is not a guarantee, but it is interesting to see governments already working in the case that it becomes a reality down the line. 

Even though the main usage of AI is heavily data-focused, states are beginning to realize that, if AI continues to evolve at the rate that it is, issues may arise where AIs begin to be used to give arbitral awards in lieu of arbitral panels.

Nathaniel Chaij

With the rapid evolution of AI, there is also a rise in worry over the swift development of the technology. Over a thousand business leaders have pushed for a six-month pause on AI development globally out of concerns that developers lack understanding over the AIs they are creating. The concern that has the strongest grip on the globe is whether AI could develop to the point where it makes it obsolete for human beings to work at all. This concern arises from cultural beliefs around AI from movies such as Terminator and 2001 A Space Odyssey. The current likelihood of AI reaching the level where it makes the human element of arbitral proceedings obsolete is far-fetched. AI in its current form is useful for analyzing raw data and then giving probabilistic outcomes. However, within arbitration, the soft “human” skills of clearly articulating the reason behind decisions are something that clients require, and AI is not good at these “soft skills.”           

Going forward, organizations should view AI as a single tool in their arbitral toolbox rather than as a magical cure-all. AI can optimize the most time-consuming and costly aspects of arbitration, and it would be to the organizations’ detriment if they ignored the realities of this new technology. Organizations should push for more transparency within AI technology to quash the concerns surrounding AI utilization if or when they occur. Twenty years ago, AI, as we currently know it, was only a part of science-fiction novels and movies, but now a quickly evolving technological revolution is occurring. While there are concerns about this new technology, those organizations that adapt to the change and use it to their advantage will have a leg up as AI continues to evolve as a mainstream technological tool.