A senior crown prosecutor(皇家检察官) acting cited an imaginary legal precedent(判例；先例) in an error that has sparked fresh concerns about AI hallucinations(AI幻觉) infecting(感染；侵蚀) the justice system.
一名代理资深皇家检察官引用了一个虚构的法律判例，这一错误引发了人们对AI幻觉侵蚀司法系统的新担忧。
Ravinder Dhillon, representing the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), referenced an entirely made-up case during a dispute over whether a child should be prosecuted for the rape of his younger sister, high court documents have revealed.(高等法院文件显示，代表皇家检察署的拉文德·迪隆在一起关于是否应起诉一名儿童强奸其妹妹的争议中，引用了一个完全捏造的案件。)
高等法院文件显示，代表皇家检察署（CPS）的拉文德·迪隆在一起关于是否应起诉一名儿童强奸其妹妹的争议中，引用了一个完全捏造的案件。
Her explanation for how the nonexistent case came to be relied on has been called “unsatisfactory” by two senior high court judges and a “serious failure” by an expert in AI and law.(她关于这个不存在的案件如何被援引的解释，被两名高等法院资深法官称为“令人不满”，被一位AI与法律专家称为“严重失误”。) The Guardian understands the reference came from an AI response generated during an internet search.
她关于这个不存在的案件如何被援引的解释，被两名高等法院资深法官称为“令人不满”，被一位AI与法律专家称为“严重失误”。《卫报》了解到，该引用来自互联网搜索时生成的AI回复。