Can we use non-transparent artificial intelligence technologies for legal purposes?

G. Adamson
{"title":"Can we use non-transparent artificial intelligence technologies for legal purposes?","authors":"G. Adamson","doi":"10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Artificial intelligence (AI) is a technology receiving significant attention from lawmakers, courts, and regulators. An aspect of this attention is an interest in understanding how AI works when applied to a process of law, or to a regulated application of technology such as driverless vehicles. One approach is to seek to understand what the AI technology does, with goals including “transparency” and “explainability”. This paper considers these concepts from a law and technology perspective. Research in this area commonly examines the challenge of “black box” technologies, particularly the approach of “post hoc explainability”. This paper points out that the post hoc approach provides an inference, rather than an actual description of AI behavior. It considers circumstances in which the post hoc approach may be satisfactory, and those involving arbitrary power in which it should not be used, as inconsistent with the principle of regularity in the rule of law. It recommends that the output of non-transparent AI technologies should necessarily be viewed critically. It concludes that human attention is required in determining whether or not to accept AI technology explanations.","PeriodicalId":196560,"journal":{"name":"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a technology receiving significant attention from lawmakers, courts, and regulators. An aspect of this attention is an interest in understanding how AI works when applied to a process of law, or to a regulated application of technology such as driverless vehicles. One approach is to seek to understand what the AI technology does, with goals including “transparency” and “explainability”. This paper considers these concepts from a law and technology perspective. Research in this area commonly examines the challenge of “black box” technologies, particularly the approach of “post hoc explainability”. This paper points out that the post hoc approach provides an inference, rather than an actual description of AI behavior. It considers circumstances in which the post hoc approach may be satisfactory, and those involving arbitrary power in which it should not be used, as inconsistent with the principle of regularity in the rule of law. It recommends that the output of non-transparent AI technologies should necessarily be viewed critically. It concludes that human attention is required in determining whether or not to accept AI technology explanations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们可以将不透明的人工智能技术用于法律目的吗?
人工智能(AI)是一项受到国会、法院、监管机构高度关注的技术。这种关注的一个方面是,有兴趣了解人工智能在应用于法律程序或无人驾驶汽车等受监管的技术应用时是如何工作的。一种方法是试图理解人工智能技术的作用,目标包括“透明度”和“可解释性”。本文从法律和技术的角度来考虑这些概念。该领域的研究通常考察“黑箱”技术的挑战,特别是“事后可解释性”的方法。本文指出,事后方法提供了一个推理,而不是对人工智能行为的实际描述。委员会认为,事后处理办法可能令人满意的情况,以及涉及不应使用事后处理办法的专断权力的情况,都不符合法治的规律性原则。它建议,必须批判性地看待不透明的人工智能技术的产出。它的结论是,在决定是否接受人工智能技术的解释时,需要人类的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Historical and Ideological Chasm between Engineering and Development Sustainability means inclusivity: engaging citizens in early stage smart city development Taiwan’s Ability to Reduce the Transmission of COVID-19: A Success Story Tesseract Optimization for Data Privacy and Sharing Economics Using Open Source Licensing to Regulate the Assembly of LAWS: A Preliminary Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1