The iRobo-Surgeon conundrum: comparative reflections on the legal treatment of intraoperative errors committed by autonomous surgical robots
Assessment outcome
total 1/4 (actionability 0 + authority 1); currency unscored, so pro-rated to 1.5/6
Authorship & scope
The text contains author acknowledgements, indicating a human author wrote the article.
Score 1: Academic article by an individual author (reputable institution acting officially/academic publishing venue without explicit peer-review status stated in text).
Issuers, who it governs, legal force and content are on the full record.
Eligibility gates
HTTP 200, 4892 words of full text extracted
The article's primary subject is autonomous surgical robots and AI liability.
Addresses legal liability frameworks, rules, and policy directives for autonomous systems.
The text contains author acknowledgements, indicating a human author wrote the article.
No evidence on the page indicates this academic article is superseded or withdrawn.
Scored criteria
Actionability
0/2Score 0 (description/analysis only): The academic article analyzes product liability frameworks and tort rules without naming binding obligations or steps to follow.
Authority
1/2Score 1: Academic article by an individual author (reputable institution acting officially/academic publishing venue without explicit peer-review status stated in text).
ABSTRACT The bridge towards fully autonomous, context-aware surgical robots is fraught with challenges, not least of which is ascribing legal responsibility
Currency
—computed: no publish/modified date found on the page (never guessed)