Governments and other groups interested in the views of citizens require the means to present justifications of proposed actions, and the means to solicit public opinion concerning these justifications. Although Internet technologies provide the means for such dialogues, system designers usually face a choice between allowing unstructured dialogues, through, for example, bulletin boards, or requiring citizens to acquire a knowledge of some argumentation schema or theory, as in, for example, ZENO. Both of these options present usability problems. In this paper, (...) we describe an implemented system called PARMENIDES which allows structured argument over a proposed course of action, without requiring knowledge of the underlying argumentation theory. (shrink)

The future of warfare will undoubtedly include autonomous systems capable of making complex decisions without human operator involvement. These systems will react blindingly fast, possess exceptional precision, and operate reliably and consistently without human supervision. While the promise of autonomy seems almost boundless, questions remain about the lawfulness of allowing such systems to select and lethally engage targets on their own. One of the consistent issues raised is whether nations wishing to employ autonomous weapon systems on the battlefield could do (...) so in a manner that would comply with the fundamental principles of the law of armed conflict. This chapter addresses the crux of that concern by examining the legal impacts these future systems might have on targeting during international armed conflicts. In particular, the chapter focuses on the requirement of nations to take feasible precautions in attack and seeks to determine whether a nation employing autonomous weapons on a battlefield might be able to fully comply. First, this chapter strives to define what is meant by autonomous weapon systems. Second, the chapter will examine the technological advances and operational benefits which portend these weapon systems may become a reality in the future. The emphasis will next shift to the unique challenges the systems present to the requirement to take feasible precautions in attack. Lastly, the author concludes that while questions regarding precaution in attack requirements raise valid concerns, the use of autonomous weapons under many circumstances will likely be deemed lawful. (shrink)

Autonomous vehicles are one of the most spectacular recent developments of Artificial Intelligence. Among the problems that still need to be solved before they can fully autonomously participate in traffic is the one of making their behaviour conform to the traffic laws. This paper discusses this problem by way of a case study of Dutch traffic law. First it is discussed to what extent Dutch traffic law exhibits features that are traditionally said to pose challenges for AI & Law models, (...) such as exceptions, rule conflicts, open texture and vagueness, rule change, and the need for commonsense knowledge. Then three approaches to the design of law-conforming AV are evaluated in light of the challenges posed by Dutch traffic law, which includes an assessment of the usefulness of AI & Law models of nonmonotonic reasoning, argumentation and case-based reasoning. (shrink)