Who should be held responsible when artificial agents engage in linguistic conduct that is legally problematic? The law already describes some ways in which owners and distributors of artificial agents can be held liable for their misuse, but what will happen when these agents have adapted to their environments in ways that make them unique? No one will be able to fully predict or understand their behaviors.
We suspect that, in such situations, society may sometimes want to hold the agents themselves responsible for their actions. This has profound implications for law, technology, and individual users.
- Adaptive Agents and Personal Responsibility
- Unexplainable Behaviors Good and Bad
- Tracing Responsibility for an Act of Defamation
- The Role of Intentionality
- A Call for Cross-Discipline Conversation
Authors: Christopher Potts is professor and chair of the Stanford Humanities & Sciences Department of Linguistics and a professor, by courtesy, of computer science. Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar is the Herman Phleger Visiting Professor of Law and serves on the Supreme Court of California. Judith Degen is an assistant professor of linguistics. Michael C. Frank is the David and Lucile Packard Foundation Professor in Human Biology and an associate professor of psychology and, by courtesy, of linguistics. Noah D. Goodman is an associate professor of psychology and of computer science and, by courtesy, of linguistics. Thomas Icard is an assistant professor of philosophy and, by courtesy, of computer science. Dorsa Sadigh is an assistant professor of computer science and of electrical engineering.
The authors are the Principal Investigators on the Stanford HAI Hoffman–Yee project “Towards grounded, adaptive communication agents.” Learn more about our Hoffman-Yee grant winners here.
