算法解释的法律建构

Luo Weiling, Liang Deng
{"title":"算法解释的法律建构","authors":"Luo Weiling, Liang Deng","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i9.122157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Nowadays the development of AI technology is not yet mature, let alone the legal definition and regulation of its type, even the type of technology itself is full of uncertain factors. Because of the rapid development of technology and the openness of theories, scientists have not yet formed a unified consensus and system on cutting-edge technical issues. Therefore, at present, governments all over the world are actively formulating the development plans of AI, but the supervision and regulation of AI are scattered and lagging behind. There is nothing wrong with encouraging the development of new technologies, but the application of technologies requires a responsible response to various ethical demands from human society. No matter what form of AI technology and its application are inseparable from the algorithm and the issue of “algorithm accountability” may probably be a focus of legal regulations on AI and the path of accountability is algorithm interpretation. It is desirable but regrettable that the EU’s GDPR stipulates the non-binding “right to explanation”. But the stop of GDPR is exactly the starting point of constructing the algorithm interpretation mechanism in law.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legal Construction of Algorithm Interpretation\",\"authors\":\"Luo Weiling, Liang Deng\",\"doi\":\"10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i9.122157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Nowadays the development of AI technology is not yet mature, let alone the legal definition and regulation of its type, even the type of technology itself is full of uncertain factors. Because of the rapid development of technology and the openness of theories, scientists have not yet formed a unified consensus and system on cutting-edge technical issues. Therefore, at present, governments all over the world are actively formulating the development plans of AI, but the supervision and regulation of AI are scattered and lagging behind. There is nothing wrong with encouraging the development of new technologies, but the application of technologies requires a responsible response to various ethical demands from human society. No matter what form of AI technology and its application are inseparable from the algorithm and the issue of “algorithm accountability” may probably be a focus of legal regulations on AI and the path of accountability is algorithm interpretation. It is desirable but regrettable that the EU’s GDPR stipulates the non-binding “right to explanation”. But the stop of GDPR is exactly the starting point of constructing the algorithm interpretation mechanism in law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":130064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i9.122157\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i9.122157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如今,人工智能技术的发展尚未成熟,更不用说对其类型的法律定义和监管,甚至技术本身的类型也充满了不确定因素。由于技术的快速发展和理论的开放性,科学家们对前沿技术问题尚未形成统一的共识和体系。因此,目前世界各国政府都在积极制定人工智能的发展规划,但对人工智能的监管却较为分散和滞后。鼓励新技术的发展并没有错,但技术的应用需要对人类社会的各种伦理要求作出负责任的回应。无论何种形式的人工智能技术及其应用都离不开算法,“算法问责”问题可能是人工智能法律规制的焦点,问责的路径就是算法解释。欧盟的GDPR规定了不具约束力的“解释权”,这是可取但令人遗憾的。而GDPR的终止恰恰是构建法律上的算法解释机制的起点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Legal Construction of Algorithm Interpretation
Nowadays the development of AI technology is not yet mature, let alone the legal definition and regulation of its type, even the type of technology itself is full of uncertain factors. Because of the rapid development of technology and the openness of theories, scientists have not yet formed a unified consensus and system on cutting-edge technical issues. Therefore, at present, governments all over the world are actively formulating the development plans of AI, but the supervision and regulation of AI are scattered and lagging behind. There is nothing wrong with encouraging the development of new technologies, but the application of technologies requires a responsible response to various ethical demands from human society. No matter what form of AI technology and its application are inseparable from the algorithm and the issue of “algorithm accountability” may probably be a focus of legal regulations on AI and the path of accountability is algorithm interpretation. It is desirable but regrettable that the EU’s GDPR stipulates the non-binding “right to explanation”. But the stop of GDPR is exactly the starting point of constructing the algorithm interpretation mechanism in law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cultural Expertise Intercultural Justice in France: Origins and Evolution Experts and the Judiciary Cultural Expertise in Civil Law in Italy Indigenous Expertise as Cultural Expertise in the World Heritage Protective Framework
×
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