{"title":"算法决策的贫乏公共性","authors":"Neli Frost","doi":"10.1093/ojls/gqae027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The increasing use of machine learning (ML) in public administration requires that we think carefully about the political and legal constraints imposed on public decision making. These developments confront us with the following interrelated questions: can algorithmic public decisions be truly ‘public’? And, to what extent does the use of ML models compromise the ‘publicness’ of such decisions? This article is part of a broader inquiry into the myriad ways in which digital and AI technologies transform the fabric of our democratic existence by mutating the ‘public’. Focusing on the site of public administration, the article develops a conception of publicness that is grounded in a view of public administrations as communities of practice. These communities operate through dialogical, critical and synergetic interactions that allow them to track—as faithfully as possible—the public’s heterogeneous view of its interests, and reify these interests in decision making. Building on this theorisation, the article suggests that the use of ML models in public decision making inevitably generates an impoverished publicness, and thus undermines the potential of public administrations to operate as a locus of democratic construction. The article thus advocates for a reconsideration of the ways in which administrative law problematises and addresses the harms of algorithmic decision making.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":"4 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":17.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impoverished Publicness of Algorithmic Decision Making\",\"authors\":\"Neli Frost\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ojls/gqae027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The increasing use of machine learning (ML) in public administration requires that we think carefully about the political and legal constraints imposed on public decision making. These developments confront us with the following interrelated questions: can algorithmic public decisions be truly ‘public’? And, to what extent does the use of ML models compromise the ‘publicness’ of such decisions? This article is part of a broader inquiry into the myriad ways in which digital and AI technologies transform the fabric of our democratic existence by mutating the ‘public’. Focusing on the site of public administration, the article develops a conception of publicness that is grounded in a view of public administrations as communities of practice. These communities operate through dialogical, critical and synergetic interactions that allow them to track—as faithfully as possible—the public’s heterogeneous view of its interests, and reify these interests in decision making. Building on this theorisation, the article suggests that the use of ML models in public decision making inevitably generates an impoverished publicness, and thus undermines the potential of public administrations to operate as a locus of democratic construction. The article thus advocates for a reconsideration of the ways in which administrative law problematises and addresses the harms of algorithmic decision making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":\"4 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":17.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqae027\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqae027","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
随着机器学习(ML)在公共管理领域的应用日益广泛,我们必须认真思考公共决策所面临的政治和法律限制。这些发展使我们面临以下相互关联的问题:算法公共决策能否真正 "公共"?使用 ML 模型会在多大程度上损害此类决策的 "公共性"?本文是对数字和人工智能技术通过改变 "公共性 "来改变我们民主生存结构的无数方式的广泛探究的一部分。文章以公共行政领域为重点,提出了公共性的概念,其基础是将公共行政视为实践社区。这些社区通过对话、批判和协同互动来运作,从而尽可能忠实地追踪公众对其利益的不同看法,并在决策中重申这些利益。在此理论基础上,文章提出,在公共决策中使用 ML 模型不可避免地会产生贫乏的公共性,从而削弱公共管理作为民主建设场所的潜力。因此,文章主张重新考虑行政法将算法决策的危害问题化并加以解决的方式。
The Impoverished Publicness of Algorithmic Decision Making
The increasing use of machine learning (ML) in public administration requires that we think carefully about the political and legal constraints imposed on public decision making. These developments confront us with the following interrelated questions: can algorithmic public decisions be truly ‘public’? And, to what extent does the use of ML models compromise the ‘publicness’ of such decisions? This article is part of a broader inquiry into the myriad ways in which digital and AI technologies transform the fabric of our democratic existence by mutating the ‘public’. Focusing on the site of public administration, the article develops a conception of publicness that is grounded in a view of public administrations as communities of practice. These communities operate through dialogical, critical and synergetic interactions that allow them to track—as faithfully as possible—the public’s heterogeneous view of its interests, and reify these interests in decision making. Building on this theorisation, the article suggests that the use of ML models in public decision making inevitably generates an impoverished publicness, and thus undermines the potential of public administrations to operate as a locus of democratic construction. The article thus advocates for a reconsideration of the ways in which administrative law problematises and addresses the harms of algorithmic decision making.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.