Definitions of intent suitable for algorithms

Artificial Intelligence and Law 31 (3):515-546 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article introduces definitions for direct, means-end, oblique (or indirect) and ulterior intent which can be used to test for intent in an algorithmic actor. These definitions of intent are informed by legal theory from common law jurisdictions. Certain crimes exist where the harm caused is dependent on the reason it was done so. Here the actus reus or performative element of the crime is dependent on the mental state or mens rea of the actor. The ability to prosecute these crimes is dependent on the ability to identify and diagnose intentional states in the accused. A certain class of auto didactic algorithmic actor can be given broad objectives without being told how to meet them. Without a definition of intent, they cannot be told not to engage in certain law breaking behaviour nor can they ever be identified as having done it. This ambiguity is neither positive for the owner of the algorithm or for society. The problem exists over and above more familiar debates concerning the eligibility of algorithms for culpability judgements that mens rea is usually associated with. Aside from inchoate offences, many economic crimes with elements of fraud or deceit fall into this category of crime. Algorithms operate in areas where these crimes could be plausibly undertaken depending on whether the intent existed in the algorithm or not.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 98,098

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Crime as Prime.Richard Holton - 2015 - The Law and Ethics of Human Rights 9 (2):181-193.
Intention in Law.Gideon Yaffe - 2010 - In Timothy O'Connor & Constantine Sandis (eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Action. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 338–344.
Crimes of ulterior intent.Jeremy Horder - 1996 - In A. P. Simester & A. T. H. Smith (eds.), Harm and culpability. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 153--68.
Instructions for Authors.[author unknown] - 2002 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 10 (1):219-224.
Instructions for Authors.[author unknown] - 2004 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (4):447-452.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-07-26

Downloads
70 (#248,046)

6 months
11 (#271,417)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.Jeremy Bentham - 1780 - New York: Dover Publications. Edited by J. H. Burns & H. L. A. Hart.
Causality.Judea Pearl - 2000 - New York: Cambridge University Press.

View all 16 references / Add more references