AI 中文总结
本文针对加密资产争议解决的现有困境，提出结合AI与智能合约的混合在线争议解决框架，以提升弱势用户的争议解决可及性，同时明确自动化与人工角色并回应相关法律治理问题。
AI 中文摘要
加密资产的日益普及催生了现有法律救济机制难以妥善处理的争议，区块链交易的技术特性、诸多关系的跨境属性以及分散的法律规则使争议解决变得复杂。对于缺乏法律或技术专业知识的用户而言，这些困难尤为突出，他们可能难以识别自身权利、整理相关证据或寻求有效救济。尽管加密资产与金融可及性相关，但它们仍可能产生新形式的数字排斥。本文研究结合人工智能与基于区块链的智能合约的混合在线争议解决框架是否可缓解这些障碍。在提出的模型中，AI主要在链下运行，支持自然语言交互、争议分类、证据整理以及可获取的法律信息；智能合约执行有限的链上功能，包括争议登记、时间戳标记、验证、托管管理，以及在适当情况下执行约定结果。该框架以人类为中心，强调可解释性、程序指导以及复杂案件中的人工监督。该模型通过涉及加密资产扣押、交易所故障和跨境诈骗的争议进行检验。本文认为，若明确界定自动化与人工角色，精心限定的混合架构可提升可及性、透明度、效率和可执行性。本文还探讨了算法偏见、责任、数据保护、智能合约可执行性以及符合《欧盟人工智能法案》和《加密资产市场监管条例》等关键法律和治理问题。因此，本文提出了一个基于法律的框架，用于在加密资产环境中实现更普惠、更稳健的争议解决。
英文摘要
The growing use of crypto-assets has generated disputes that sit uneasily within existing legal redress mechanisms. Their resolution is complicated by the technical features of blockchain transactions, the cross-border nature of many relationships, and fragmented legal rules. These difficulties are particularly acute for users without legal or technical expertise, who may struggle to identify their rights, organise relevant evidence, or pursue an effective remedy. Crypto-assets may therefore produce new forms of digital exclusion, despite their association with financial accessibility. This paper examines whether a hybrid Online Dispute Resolution framework combining artificial intelligence and blockchain-based smart contracts could mitigate these barriers. In the proposed model, AI operates primarily off-chain, supporting natural-language interaction, dispute classification, evidence organisation, and accessible legal information. Smart contracts perform limited on-chain functions, including dispute registration, timestamping, verification, escrow management, and, where appropriate, execution of agreed outcomes. The framework is human-centred, with emphasis on explainability, procedural guidance, and human oversight in complex cases. The model is examined through disputes involving crypto-asset seizure, exchange failures, and cross-border scams. The paper argues that a carefully delimited hybrid architecture may improve accessibility, transparency, efficiency, and enforceability, provided that automated and human roles are clearly defined. It also addresses key legal and governance concerns, including algorithmic bias, liability, data protection, smart-contract enforceability, and compliance with the EU AI Act and the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation. The paper thus proposes a legally grounded framework for more inclusive and robust dispute resolution in crypto-asset environments.
