MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103681542 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.119

Pressing Issues of Unlawful Application of Artificial Intelligence

2020· article· en· W3103681542 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDigital Transformation in Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKazan Federal University
KeywordsLegislatorImpossibilityCriminal lawLiabilitySubject (documents)LawCriminal liabilityComputer securityPolitical scienceComputer scienceSociologyLegislationLaw and economicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article discusses the problematic aspects of the implementation and application of artificial intelligence technology at the present stage of its development. The authors provide definitions of this technology, with its essential properties revealed based on their analysis. Criminological forecasting helps identify groups of crimes most likely to be committed through the use of artificial intelligence. The authors believe that at present there are not sufficient grounds for distancing ourselves from the issue of the subject of criminal liability in case of damage to public relations directly by the AI, but there are no circumstances due to which its resolution would not be delayed. The system of criminal law relations must be built based on scientifically developed provisions. The problems of criminal legal regulation, in terms of the impossibility of criminalizing and penalizing socially dangerous acts committed by artificial intelligence, are revealed. The legislator is asked to develop and adopt legal acts regulating the creation, operation, and use of artificial intelligence.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it