Governing Artificial Intelligence and Algorithmic Decision Making: Human Rights and Beyond

2021 ◽  
pp. 173-184
Author(s):  
Vasiliki Koniakou
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius

Algorithmic decision-making and other types of artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to predict who will commit crime, who will be a good employee, who will default on a loan, etc. However, algorithmic decision-making can also threaten human rights, such as the right to non-discrimination. The paper evaluates current legal protection in Europe against discriminatory algorithmic decisions. The paper shows that non-discrimination law, in particular through the concept of indirect discrimination, prohibits many types of algorithmic discrimination. Data protection law could also help to defend people against discrimination. Proper enforcement of non-discrimination law and data protection law could help to protect people. However, the paper shows that both legal instruments have severe weaknesses when applied to artificial intelligence. The paper suggests how enforcement of current rules can be improved. The paper also explores whether additional rules are needed. The paper argues for sector-specific – rather than general – rules, and outlines an approach to regulate algorithmic decision-making.


J ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 486-499
Author(s):  
Rolf H. Weber

Artificial intelligence and algorithmic decision-making causes new (technological) challenges for the normative environment around the globe. Fundamental legal principles (such as non-discrimination, human rights, transparency) need to be strengthened by regulatory interventions. The contribution pleads for a combination of regulatory models (hard law and soft law); based on this assessment, the recent European legislative initiatives are analyzed.


Author(s):  
Yu. S. Kharitonova ◽  
◽  
V. S. Savina ◽  
F. Pagnini ◽  
◽  
...  

Introduction: this paper focuses on the legal problems of applying the artificial intelligence technology when solving socio-economic problems. The convergence of two disruptive technologies – Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Data Science – has created a fundamental transformation of social relations in various spheres of human life. A transformational role was played by classical areas of artificial intelligence such as algorithmic logic, planning, knowledge representation, modeling, autonomous systems, multiagent systems, expert systems (ES), decision support systems (DSS), simulation, pattern recognition, image processing, and natural language processing (NLP), as well as by special areas such as representation learning, machine learning, optimization, statistical modeling, mathematical modeling, data analytics, knowledge discovery, complexity science, computational intelligence, event analysis, behavior analysis, social network analysis, and also deep learning and cognitive computing. The mentioned AI and Big Data technologies are used in various business spheres to simplify and accelerate decision-making of different kinds and significance. At the same time, self-learning algorithms create or reproduce inequalities between participants in circulation, lead to discrimination of all kinds due to algorithmic bias. Purpose: to define the areas and directions of legal regulation of algorithmic bias in the application of artificial intelligence from the legal perspective, based on the analysis of Russian and foreign scientific concepts. Methods: empirical methods of comparison, description, interpretation; theoretical methods of formal and dialectical logic; special scientific methods such as the legal-dogmatic method and the method of interpretation of legal norms. Results: artificial intelligence has many advantages (it allows us to improve creativity, services and lifestyle, to enhance the security, helps in solving various problems), but at the same time it causes numerous concerns due to the harmful effects on individual autonomy, privacy, and fundamental human rights and freedoms. Algorithmic bias exists even when the algorithm developer has no intention to discriminate, and even when the recommendation system does not accept demographic information as input: even in the absence of this information, due to thorough analysis of the similarities between products and users, the algorithm may recommend a product to a very homogeneous set of users. The identified problems and risks of AI bias should be taken into consideration by lawyers and developers and should be mitigated to the fullest extent possible, both when developing ethical principles and requirements and in the field of legal policy and law at the national and supranational levels. The legal community sees the opportunity to solve the problem of algorithmic bias through various kinds of declarations, policies, and standards to be followed in the development, testing, and operation of AI systems. Conclusions: if left unaddressed, biased algorithms could lead to decisions that would have a disparate collective impact on specific groups of people even without the programmer’s intent to make a distinction. The study of the anticipated and unintended consequences of applying AI algorithms is especially necessary today because the current public policy may be insufficient to identify, mitigate, and remedy the effects of such non-obvious bias on participants in legal relations. Solving the issues of algorithmic bias by technical means alone will not lead to the desired results. The world community recognizes the need to introduce standardization and develop ethical principles, which would ensure proper decision-making with the application of artificial intelligence. It is necessary to create special rules that would restrict algorithmic bias. Regardless of the areas where such violations are revealed, they have standard features of unfair behavior of the participants in social relations and can be qualified as violations of human rights or fair competition. Minimization of algorithmic bias is possible through the obligatory introduction into circulation of data in the form that would not allow explicit or implicit segregation of various groups of society, i.e. it should become possible to analyze only data without any explicit attributes of groups, data in their full diversity. As a result, the AI model would be built on the analysis of data from all socio-legal groups of society.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 158-162
Author(s):  
Daragh Murray

States are investing heavily in artificial intelligence (AI) technology, and are actively incorporating AI tools across the full spectrum of their decision-making processes. However, AI tools are currently deployed without a full understanding of their impact on individuals or society, and in the absence of effective domestic or international regulatory frameworks. Although this haste to deploy is understandable given AI's significant potential, it is unsatisfactory. The inappropriate deployment of AI technologies risks litigation, public backlash, and harm to human rights. In turn, this is likely to delay or frustrate beneficial AI deployments. This essay suggests that human rights law offers a solution. It provides an organizing framework that states should draw on to guide their decisions to deploy AI (or not), and can facilitate the clear and transparent justification of those decisions.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Avishek Choudhury

UNSTRUCTURED Objective: The potential benefits of artificial intelligence based decision support system (AI-DSS) from a theoretical perspective are well documented and perceived by researchers but there is a lack of evidence showing its influence on routine clinical practice and how its perceived by care providers. Since the effectiveness of AI systems depends on data quality, implementation, and interpretation. The purpose of this literature review is to analyze the effectiveness of AI-DSS in clinical setting and understand its influence on clinician’s decision making outcome. Materials and Methods: This review protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses reporting guidelines. Literature will be identified using a multi-database search strategy developed in consultation with a librarian. The proposed screening process consists of a title and abstract scan, followed by a full-text review by two reviewers to determine the eligibility of articles. Studies outlining application of AI based decision support system in a clinical setting and its impact on clinician’s decision making, will be included. A tabular synthesis of the general study details will be provided, as well as a narrative synthesis of the extracted data, organised into themes. Studies solely reporting AI accuracy an but not implemented in a clinical setting to measure its influence on clinical decision making were excluded from further review. Results: We identified 8 eligible studies that implemented AI-DSS in a clinical setting to facilitate decisions concerning prostate cancer, post traumatic stress disorder, cardiac ailment, back pain, and others. Five (62.50%) out of 8 studies reported positive outcome of AI-DSS. Conclusion: The systematic review indicated that AI-enabled decision support systems, when implemented in a clinical setting and used by clinicians might not ensure enhanced decision making. However, there are very limited studies to confirm the claim that AI based decision support system can uplift clinicians decision making abilities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document