Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLewis, Dustin
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-25T16:01:51Z
dc.date.issued2019-03-21
dc.identifier.citationLewis, Dustin. “Legal reviews of weapons, means and methods of warfare involving artificial intelligence: 16 elements to consider,” Humanitarian Law & Policy (blog), March 21, 2019. https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2019/03/21/legal-reviews-weapons-means-methods-warfare-artificial-intelligence-16-elements-consider/en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://nrs.harvard.edu/URN-3:HUL.INSTREPOS:37367711*
dc.description.abstractWhat are some of the chief concerns in contemporary debates around legal reviews of weapons, means or methods of warfare involving techniques or tools related to artificial intelligence (AI)? One session of the December 2018 workshop on AI at the frontiers of international law concerning armed conflict focused on this topic. In this post, I outline a few key threshold considerations and briefly enumerate 16 elements that States might consider as part of their legal reviews involving AI-related techniques or tools. It is imperative, in general, for States to adopt robust verification, testing and monitoring regimes as part of the process to determine and impose limitations and—as warranted—prohibitions in respect of an employment of weapons, means or methods of warfare. Where AI-related techniques or tools are—or might be—involved, the design and implementation of legal review regimes might pose particular kinds and degrees of challenges as well as opportunities. With respect to challenges, for example, in a forthcoming blog post Netta Goussac will highlight several legal and other concerns that might arise in respect of reviews of weapons involving AI, not least the potential to introduce uncertainty and corresponding issues regarding (un)predictably and (un)reliability. Furthermore, today it seems, from my perspective, that sufficient trust among States in this area seems to be lacking, at least among certain States with advanced technological capabilities. Against that background, robust legal reviews may not only contribute to legal compliance, but may also help foster normative stability and augment trust among States.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherHumanitarian Law & Policyen_US
dc.relationInternational Committee of the Red Cross Blogen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttp://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2019/03/21/legal-reviews-weapons-means-methods-warfare-artificial-intelligence-16-elements-consider/en_US
dash.licenseLAA
dc.titleLegal reviews of weapons, means and methods of warfare involving artificial intelligence: 16 elements to consideren_US
dc.typeBlog Entryen_US
dc.description.versionVersion of Recorden_US
dc.relation.journalHumanitarian Law & Policyen_US
dash.depositing.authorLewis, Dustin
dc.date.available2021-05-25T16:01:51Z
dash.affiliation.otherHarvard Law Schoolen_US
dash.contributor.affiliatedLewis, Dustin


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record