数据访问机制对人工智能和机器学习的重要性

ERN: Monopoly Pub Date : 2018-12-01 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3357652
B. Martens
{"title":"数据访问机制对人工智能和机器学习的重要性","authors":"B. Martens","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3357652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Digitization triggered a steep drop in the cost of information. The resulting data glut created a bottleneck because human cognitive capacity is unable to cope with large amounts of information. Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) triggered a similar drop in the cost of machine-based decision-making and helps in overcoming this bottleneck. Substantial change in the relative price of resources puts pressure on ownership and access rights to these resources. This explains pressure on access rights to data. ML thrives on access to big and varied datasets. We discuss the implications of access regimes for the development of AI in its current form of ML. The economic characteristics of data (non-rivalry, economies of scale and scope) favour data aggregation in big datasets. Non-rivalry implies the need for exclusive rights in order to incentivise data production when it is costly. The balance between access and exclusion is at the centre of the debate on data regimes. We explore the economic implications of several modalities for access to data, ranging from exclusive monopolistic control to monopolistic competition and free access. Regulatory intervention may push the market beyond voluntary exchanges, either towards more openness or reduced access. This may generate private costs for firms and individuals. Society can choose to do so if the social benefits of this intervention outweigh the private costs. We briefly discuss the main EU legal instruments that are relevant for data access and ownership, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that defines the rights of data subjects with respect to their personal data and the Database Directive (DBD) that grants ownership rights to database producers. These two instruments leave a wide legal no-man's land where data access is ruled by bilateral contracts and Technical Protection Measures that give exclusive control to de facto data holders, and by market forces that drive access, trade and pricing of data. The absence of exclusive rights might facilitate data sharing and access or it may result in a segmented data landscape where data aggregation for ML purposes is hard to achieve. It is unclear if incompletely specified ownership and access rights maximize the welfare of society and facilitate the development of AI/ML.","PeriodicalId":142139,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Monopoly","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Importance of Data Access Regimes for Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning\",\"authors\":\"B. Martens\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3357652\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Digitization triggered a steep drop in the cost of information. The resulting data glut created a bottleneck because human cognitive capacity is unable to cope with large amounts of information. Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) triggered a similar drop in the cost of machine-based decision-making and helps in overcoming this bottleneck. Substantial change in the relative price of resources puts pressure on ownership and access rights to these resources. This explains pressure on access rights to data. ML thrives on access to big and varied datasets. We discuss the implications of access regimes for the development of AI in its current form of ML. The economic characteristics of data (non-rivalry, economies of scale and scope) favour data aggregation in big datasets. Non-rivalry implies the need for exclusive rights in order to incentivise data production when it is costly. The balance between access and exclusion is at the centre of the debate on data regimes. We explore the economic implications of several modalities for access to data, ranging from exclusive monopolistic control to monopolistic competition and free access. Regulatory intervention may push the market beyond voluntary exchanges, either towards more openness or reduced access. This may generate private costs for firms and individuals. Society can choose to do so if the social benefits of this intervention outweigh the private costs. We briefly discuss the main EU legal instruments that are relevant for data access and ownership, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that defines the rights of data subjects with respect to their personal data and the Database Directive (DBD) that grants ownership rights to database producers. These two instruments leave a wide legal no-man's land where data access is ruled by bilateral contracts and Technical Protection Measures that give exclusive control to de facto data holders, and by market forces that drive access, trade and pricing of data. The absence of exclusive rights might facilitate data sharing and access or it may result in a segmented data landscape where data aggregation for ML purposes is hard to achieve. It is unclear if incompletely specified ownership and access rights maximize the welfare of society and facilitate the development of AI/ML.\",\"PeriodicalId\":142139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Monopoly\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Monopoly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3357652\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Monopoly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3357652","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

数字化引发了信息成本的急剧下降。由此产生的数据过剩造成了一个瓶颈,因为人类的认知能力无法处理大量的信息。人工智能和机器学习(AI/ML)引发了基于机器的决策成本的类似下降,并有助于克服这一瓶颈。资源相对价格的巨大变化给这些资源的所有权和使用权带来了压力。这解释了对数据访问权的压力。ML在访问大而多样的数据集上蓬勃发展。我们讨论了以当前形式的ML开发人工智能的访问制度的影响。数据的经济特征(非竞争、规模经济和范围经济)有利于大数据集中的数据聚合。非竞争意味着需要专有权,以便在数据生产成本高昂时激励数据生产。获取与排除之间的平衡是有关数据制度的辩论的核心。我们探讨了获取数据的几种模式的经济含义,从排他性垄断控制到垄断竞争和自由获取。监管干预可能会推动市场超越自愿交换,要么走向更开放,要么减少准入。这可能会给企业和个人带来私人成本。如果这种干预的社会效益超过私人成本,社会可以选择这样做。我们将简要讨论与数据访问和所有权相关的主要欧盟法律文书,包括定义数据主体对其个人数据的权利的《通用数据保护条例》(GDPR)和授予数据库生产者所有权的《数据库指令》(DBD)。这两项文书留下了一个广阔的法律无人区,数据获取由双边合同和技术保护措施来决定,这些合同和技术保护措施将独家控制权交给事实上的数据持有者,并由推动数据获取、交易和定价的市场力量来决定。缺乏专有权可能会促进数据共享和访问,或者可能导致数据分割,难以实现ML目的的数据聚合。目前尚不清楚,不完全指定的所有权和访问权是否能最大限度地提高社会福利,并促进人工智能/机器学习的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Importance of Data Access Regimes for Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
Digitization triggered a steep drop in the cost of information. The resulting data glut created a bottleneck because human cognitive capacity is unable to cope with large amounts of information. Artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) triggered a similar drop in the cost of machine-based decision-making and helps in overcoming this bottleneck. Substantial change in the relative price of resources puts pressure on ownership and access rights to these resources. This explains pressure on access rights to data. ML thrives on access to big and varied datasets. We discuss the implications of access regimes for the development of AI in its current form of ML. The economic characteristics of data (non-rivalry, economies of scale and scope) favour data aggregation in big datasets. Non-rivalry implies the need for exclusive rights in order to incentivise data production when it is costly. The balance between access and exclusion is at the centre of the debate on data regimes. We explore the economic implications of several modalities for access to data, ranging from exclusive monopolistic control to monopolistic competition and free access. Regulatory intervention may push the market beyond voluntary exchanges, either towards more openness or reduced access. This may generate private costs for firms and individuals. Society can choose to do so if the social benefits of this intervention outweigh the private costs. We briefly discuss the main EU legal instruments that are relevant for data access and ownership, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that defines the rights of data subjects with respect to their personal data and the Database Directive (DBD) that grants ownership rights to database producers. These two instruments leave a wide legal no-man's land where data access is ruled by bilateral contracts and Technical Protection Measures that give exclusive control to de facto data holders, and by market forces that drive access, trade and pricing of data. The absence of exclusive rights might facilitate data sharing and access or it may result in a segmented data landscape where data aggregation for ML purposes is hard to achieve. It is unclear if incompletely specified ownership and access rights maximize the welfare of society and facilitate the development of AI/ML.
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信