MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125754116 · doi:10.3138/utlj.4006

Self-driving laws

2016· article· en· W3125754116 on OpenAlex
Anthony J. Casey, Anthony Niblett

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

VenueUniversity of Toronto Law Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelf drivingComputer scienceState (computer science)LawArtificial intelligencePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machines refine and improve products. Artificially intelligent machines will soon have the same effect on the law. Future developments in artificial intelligence and machine learning will dramatically reduce the costs currently associated with rules and standards. Extending this insight, we predict a world of precisely tailored laws (‘micro-directives’) that specify exactly what is permissible in every unique situation. These micro-directives will be largely automated. If the state of the world changes, or if the objective of the law is changed, the law will instantly update. The law will become ‘self-driving.’ The evolutionary path towards self-driving laws will be piecemeal and incremental. At first, machine-driven algorithms will merely be used to guide humans, but, over time, law will increasingly reflect principles and prescriptions developed by machines. We explore three extensions. First, we examine the possibility that the technology is not merely used to provide information about the state of the law but is also used as means of command by the state. Second, we ask how these technological changes will affect contracting behaviour. Third, we examine the effect of micro-directives on social norms.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.255 · 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