边缘地带的技术:早期测谎仪、机器学习和改革派法律现实主义

Q1 Social Sciences
M. Oswald
{"title":"边缘地带的技术:早期测谎仪、机器学习和改革派法律现实主义","authors":"M. Oswald","doi":"10.1080/13600869.2020.1733758","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Contemporary discussions and disagreements about the deployment of machine learning, especially in criminal justice contexts, have no foreseeable end. Developers, practitioners and regulators could however usefully look back one hundred years to the similar arguments made when polygraph machines were first introduced in the United States. While polygraph devices and machine learning operate in distinctly different ways, at their heart, they both attempt to predict something about a person based on how others have behaved. This paper, through an historical perspective, examines the development of the polygraph within the justice system – both in courts and during criminal investigations – and draws parallels to today’s discussion. It can be argued that the promotion of lie detectors supported a reforming legal realist approach, something that continues today in the debates over the deployment of machine learning where ‘public good’ aims are in play, and raises questions around how key principles of the rule of law can best be upheld. Finally, this paper will propose a number of regulatory solutions informed by the early lie detector experience.","PeriodicalId":53660,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technologies in the twilight zone: early lie detectors, machine learning and reformist legal realism\",\"authors\":\"M. Oswald\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13600869.2020.1733758\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Contemporary discussions and disagreements about the deployment of machine learning, especially in criminal justice contexts, have no foreseeable end. Developers, practitioners and regulators could however usefully look back one hundred years to the similar arguments made when polygraph machines were first introduced in the United States. While polygraph devices and machine learning operate in distinctly different ways, at their heart, they both attempt to predict something about a person based on how others have behaved. This paper, through an historical perspective, examines the development of the polygraph within the justice system – both in courts and during criminal investigations – and draws parallels to today’s discussion. It can be argued that the promotion of lie detectors supported a reforming legal realist approach, something that continues today in the debates over the deployment of machine learning where ‘public good’ aims are in play, and raises questions around how key principles of the rule of law can best be upheld. Finally, this paper will propose a number of regulatory solutions informed by the early lie detector experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2020.1733758\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Law, Computers and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2020.1733758","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

当代关于机器学习部署的讨论和分歧,特别是在刑事司法背景下,没有可预见的结局。然而,开发者、从业者和监管者可以回顾一百年前美国首次引入测谎仪时所提出的类似论点。虽然测谎仪和机器学习的运作方式截然不同,但从本质上讲,它们都试图根据他人的行为来预测一个人的某些方面。本文从历史的角度考察了测谎仪在司法系统中的发展——无论是在法庭上还是在刑事调查中——并与今天的讨论进行了对比。可以说,推广测谎仪支持了一种改革的法律现实主义方法,这种方法在今天关于“公共利益”目标发挥作用的机器学习部署的辩论中仍在继续,并提出了关于如何最好地维护法治关键原则的问题。最后,本文将根据早期测谎仪的经验提出一些监管解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Technologies in the twilight zone: early lie detectors, machine learning and reformist legal realism
ABSTRACT Contemporary discussions and disagreements about the deployment of machine learning, especially in criminal justice contexts, have no foreseeable end. Developers, practitioners and regulators could however usefully look back one hundred years to the similar arguments made when polygraph machines were first introduced in the United States. While polygraph devices and machine learning operate in distinctly different ways, at their heart, they both attempt to predict something about a person based on how others have behaved. This paper, through an historical perspective, examines the development of the polygraph within the justice system – both in courts and during criminal investigations – and draws parallels to today’s discussion. It can be argued that the promotion of lie detectors supported a reforming legal realist approach, something that continues today in the debates over the deployment of machine learning where ‘public good’ aims are in play, and raises questions around how key principles of the rule of law can best be upheld. Finally, this paper will propose a number of regulatory solutions informed by the early lie detector experience.
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
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
×
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