Liability regimes in the age of AI: a use-case driven analysis of the burden of proof

IF 4.5 3区 计算机科学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research Pub Date : 2022-11-03 DOI:10.1613/jair.1.14565
David Fern'andez Llorca, V. Charisi, Ronan Hamon, Ignacio E. S'anchez, Emilia G'omez
{"title":"Liability regimes in the age of AI: a use-case driven analysis of the burden of proof","authors":"David Fern'andez Llorca, V. Charisi, Ronan Hamon, Ignacio E. S'anchez, Emilia G'omez","doi":"10.1613/jair.1.14565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"New emerging technologies powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI) have the potential to disruptively transform our societies for the better. In particular, data-driven learning approaches (i.e., Machine Learning (ML)) have been a true revolution in the advancement of multiple technologies in various application domains. But at the same time there is growing concern about certain intrinsic characteristics of these methodologies that carry potential risks to both safety and fundamental rights. Although there are mechanisms in the adoption process to minimize these risks (e.g., safety regulations), these do not exclude the possibility of harm occurring, and if this happens, victims should be able to seek compensation. Liability regimes will therefore play a key role in ensuring basic protection for victims using or interacting with these systems. However, the same characteristics that make AI systems inherently risky, such as lack of causality, opacity, unpredictability or their self and continuous learning capabilities, may lead to considerable difficulties when it comes to proving causation. This paper presents three case studies, as well as the methodology to reach them, that illustrate these difficulties. Specifically, we address the cases of cleaning robots, delivery drones and robots in education. The outcome of the proposed analysis suggests the need to revise liability regimes to alleviate the burden of proof on victims in cases involving AI technologies.\n\n\n\nThis article appears in the AI & Society track.\n\n\n","PeriodicalId":54877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research","volume":"36 1","pages":"613-644"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.14565","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

New emerging technologies powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI) have the potential to disruptively transform our societies for the better. In particular, data-driven learning approaches (i.e., Machine Learning (ML)) have been a true revolution in the advancement of multiple technologies in various application domains. But at the same time there is growing concern about certain intrinsic characteristics of these methodologies that carry potential risks to both safety and fundamental rights. Although there are mechanisms in the adoption process to minimize these risks (e.g., safety regulations), these do not exclude the possibility of harm occurring, and if this happens, victims should be able to seek compensation. Liability regimes will therefore play a key role in ensuring basic protection for victims using or interacting with these systems. However, the same characteristics that make AI systems inherently risky, such as lack of causality, opacity, unpredictability or their self and continuous learning capabilities, may lead to considerable difficulties when it comes to proving causation. This paper presents three case studies, as well as the methodology to reach them, that illustrate these difficulties. Specifically, we address the cases of cleaning robots, delivery drones and robots in education. The outcome of the proposed analysis suggests the need to revise liability regimes to alleviate the burden of proof on victims in cases involving AI technologies. This article appears in the AI & Society track.
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
人工智能时代的责任制度:用例驱动的举证责任分析
由人工智能(AI)驱动的新兴技术有可能颠覆性地改变我们的社会,使其变得更好。特别是,数据驱动的学习方法(即机器学习(ML))已经成为各种应用领域中多种技术进步的真正革命。但与此同时,人们越来越担心这些方法的某些内在特征会对安全和基本权利带来潜在风险。虽然在收养过程中有尽量减少这些风险的机制(例如安全条例),但这些机制并不排除发生伤害的可能性,如果发生这种情况,受害者应该能够寻求赔偿。因此,责任制度将在确保对使用这些系统或与之互动的受害者提供基本保护方面发挥关键作用。然而,人工智能系统固有的风险特征,如缺乏因果关系、不透明、不可预测性或其自我和持续学习能力,可能会在证明因果关系时导致相当大的困难。本文提出了三个案例研究,以及达到它们的方法,说明了这些困难。具体来说,我们讨论了清洁机器人、送货无人机和教育机器人的情况。拟议分析的结果表明,需要修订责任制度,以减轻涉及人工智能技术的案件中受害者的举证责任。本文出现在人工智能与社会轨道上。
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
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research
Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 工程技术-计算机:人工智能
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
98
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: JAIR(ISSN 1076 - 9757) covers all areas of artificial intelligence (AI), publishing refereed research articles, survey articles, and technical notes. Established in 1993 as one of the first electronic scientific journals, JAIR is indexed by INSPEC, Science Citation Index, and MathSciNet. JAIR reviews papers within approximately three months of submission and publishes accepted articles on the internet immediately upon receiving the final versions. JAIR articles are published for free distribution on the internet by the AI Access Foundation, and for purchase in bound volumes by AAAI Press.
期刊最新文献
Collective Belief Revision Competitive Equilibria with a Constant Number of Chores Improving Resource Allocations by Sharing in Pairs A General Model for Aggregating Annotations Across Simple, Complex, and Multi-Object Annotation Tasks Asymptotics of K-Fold Cross Validation
×
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