人/机器(学习)互动、人的能动性和国际人道法比例标准

IF 1.7 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Global Society Pub Date : 2023-11-08 DOI:10.1080/13600826.2023.2267592
Taylor Kate Woodcock
{"title":"人/机器(学习)互动、人的能动性和国际人道法比例标准","authors":"Taylor Kate Woodcock","doi":"10.1080/13600826.2023.2267592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Developments in machine learning prompt questions about algorithmic decision-support systems (DSS) in warfare. This article explores how the use of these technologies impact practices of legal reasoning in military targeting. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) requires assessment of the proportionality of attacks, namely whether the expected incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects is excessive compared to the anticipated military advantage. Situating human agency in this practice of legal reasoning, this article considers whether the interaction between commanders (and the teams that support them) and algorithmic DSS for proportionality assessments alter this practice and displace the exercise of human agency. As DSS that purport to provide recommendations on proportionality generate output in a manner substantively different to proportionality assessments, these systems are not fit for purpose. Moreover, legal reasoning may be shaped by DSS that provide intelligence information due to the limits of reliability, biases and opacity characteristic of machine learning.","PeriodicalId":46197,"journal":{"name":"Global Society","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human/Machine(-Learning) Interactions, Human Agency and the International Humanitarian Law Proportionality Standard\",\"authors\":\"Taylor Kate Woodcock\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13600826.2023.2267592\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Developments in machine learning prompt questions about algorithmic decision-support systems (DSS) in warfare. This article explores how the use of these technologies impact practices of legal reasoning in military targeting. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) requires assessment of the proportionality of attacks, namely whether the expected incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects is excessive compared to the anticipated military advantage. Situating human agency in this practice of legal reasoning, this article considers whether the interaction between commanders (and the teams that support them) and algorithmic DSS for proportionality assessments alter this practice and displace the exercise of human agency. As DSS that purport to provide recommendations on proportionality generate output in a manner substantively different to proportionality assessments, these systems are not fit for purpose. Moreover, legal reasoning may be shaped by DSS that provide intelligence information due to the limits of reliability, biases and opacity characteristic of machine learning.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Society\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2023.2267592\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2023.2267592","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

机器学习的发展引发了关于战争中算法决策支持系统(DSS)的问题。本文探讨了这些技术的使用如何影响军事目标中的法律推理实践。国际人道主义法要求评估攻击的相称性,即与预期的军事优势相比,对平民和民用物体的预期附带伤害是否过大。本文将人类代理置于这种法律推理实践中,考虑指挥官(以及支持他们的团队)与用于比例评估的算法决策支持系统之间的互动是否改变了这种实践并取代了人类代理的行使。由于旨在就相称性提出建议的发展支助事务所产生的产出与相称性评价的方式大不相同,因此这些制度不符合目的。此外,由于机器学习的可靠性、偏见和不透明性的限制,法律推理可能由提供情报信息的DSS塑造。
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
Human/Machine(-Learning) Interactions, Human Agency and the International Humanitarian Law Proportionality Standard
Developments in machine learning prompt questions about algorithmic decision-support systems (DSS) in warfare. This article explores how the use of these technologies impact practices of legal reasoning in military targeting. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) requires assessment of the proportionality of attacks, namely whether the expected incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects is excessive compared to the anticipated military advantage. Situating human agency in this practice of legal reasoning, this article considers whether the interaction between commanders (and the teams that support them) and algorithmic DSS for proportionality assessments alter this practice and displace the exercise of human agency. As DSS that purport to provide recommendations on proportionality generate output in a manner substantively different to proportionality assessments, these systems are not fit for purpose. Moreover, legal reasoning may be shaped by DSS that provide intelligence information due to the limits of reliability, biases and opacity characteristic of machine learning.
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
Global Society
Global Society INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Global Society covers the new agenda in global and international relations and encourages innovative approaches to the study of global and international issues from a range of disciplines. It promotes the analysis of transactions at multiple levels, and in particular, the way in which these transactions blur the distinction between the sub-national, national, transnational, international and global levels. An ever integrating global society raises a number of issues for global and international relations which do not fit comfortably within established "Paradigms" Among these are the international and global consequences of nationalism and struggles for identity, migration, racism, religious fundamentalism, terrorism and criminal activities.
期刊最新文献
Passivity as Resistance: Counter-Conduct in Japan and Cambodia Counter-Conducts: A Foucauldian Analytics of Popup Civic Actions in Mexico Authoritarianism, Governmentality and the COVID-19 Response Re-thinking Global Governance as Fuzzy: Multi-Scalar Boundaries of Responsibility in the Arctic Multilateralism at War: Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine, the G20 and World Order
×
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