Examining the validity of the "expert theory" in the process of distributing damages and the issues surrounding it is one of the most challenging jurisprudential and legal issues that has always been and will be a point of contention among experts in the history of civil liability law. From the perspective of civil liability, examining a liability-generating event is a process that begins with choosing the basis of civil liability and ends with the distribution of damages. In this article, using a combined study method (library and field), an attempt has been made to answer questions such as: Is the distribution of damages among various officials in the Iranian legal system a matter of decree that the legislator should determine, or is it a matter of fact that, like other subject-matter matters, should be left to the investigating authority to determine? What role does the expert theory play in this process and under what circumstances can it be relied upon? Can mathematics and then artificial intelligence be used in the distribution of damages? It seems that although the distribution of damages in Imami jurisprudence and statutory laws is apparently considered a judicial matter, it is in essence a subjective matter. Therefore, in order to issue a ruling on the distribution of damages, especially in complex legal cases, referring to expert theory - by observing specific rules and criteria and without delegating judgment to experts, contrary to the usual practice in courts - is a worthy and necessary step. Finally, utilizing mathematics, converting qualitative indicators into quantitative ones, designing precise formulas, and using the capabilities of artificial intelligence can make the distribution of damages scientific and integrated, minimize the application of taste, and restore expert theory to its original and true position.