Abstract
Principled accountability in the aftermath of harms is essential to the trustworthy design and governance of algorithmic decision making. Legal theory offers a paramount method for assessing culpability: putting the agent 'on the stand' to subject their actions and intentions to cross-examination. We show that under minimal assumptions automated reasoning can rigorously interrogate algorithmic behaviors as in the adversarial process of legal fact finding. We use the formal methods of symbolic execution and satisfiability modulo theories (SMT) solving to discharge queries about agent behavior in factual and counterfactual scenarios, as adaptively formulated by a human investigator. We implement our framework and demonstrate its utility on an illustrative car crash scenario.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | CSLAW 2024 - Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Computer Science and Law |
Pages | 73-85 |
Number of pages | 13 |
ISBN (Electronic) | 9798400703331 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 12 Mar 2024 |
Event | 2024 Computer Science and Law Symposium: CSLAW 2024 - Boston, United States Duration: 12 Mar 2024 → 12 Mar 2024 |
Conference
Conference | 2024 Computer Science and Law Symposium |
---|---|
Abbreviated title | CSLAW 2024 |
Country/Territory | United States |
City | Boston |
Period | 12/03/24 → 12/03/24 |
Keywords
- algorithmic decision making
- algorithmic accountability
- formal methods
- SMT solving
- symbolic execution
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Artificial Intelligence
- Communication
- Law
- Computer Networks and Communications