(Beyond) Reasonable Doubt: Challenges that Public Defenders Face in Scrutinizing AI in Court

Fuente: arXiv
Enregistré dans:
Détails bibliographiques
Auteurs principaux: Jin, Angela, Salehi, Niloufar
Format: Preprint
Publié: 2024
Sujets:
Accès en ligne:
Tags: Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
_version_ 1866911804390637568
author Jin, Angela
Salehi, Niloufar
author_facet Jin, Angela
Salehi, Niloufar
contents Accountable use of AI systems in high-stakes settings relies on making systems contestable. In this paper we study efforts to contest AI systems in practice by studying how public defenders scrutinize AI in court. We present findings from interviews with 17 people in the U.S. public defense community to understand their perceptions of and experiences scrutinizing computational forensic software (CFS) -- automated decision systems that the government uses to convict and incarcerate, such as facial recognition, gunshot detection, and probabilistic genotyping tools. We find that our participants faced challenges assessing and contesting CFS reliability due to difficulties (a) navigating how CFS is developed and used, (b) overcoming judges and jurors' non-critical perceptions of CFS, and (c) gathering CFS expertise. To conclude, we provide recommendations that center the technical, social, and institutional context to better position interventions such as performance evaluations to support contestability in practice.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2403_13004
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle (Beyond) Reasonable Doubt: Challenges that Public Defenders Face in Scrutinizing AI in Court
Jin, Angela
Salehi, Niloufar
Computers and Society
Artificial Intelligence
Human-Computer Interaction
K.4.0
Accountable use of AI systems in high-stakes settings relies on making systems contestable. In this paper we study efforts to contest AI systems in practice by studying how public defenders scrutinize AI in court. We present findings from interviews with 17 people in the U.S. public defense community to understand their perceptions of and experiences scrutinizing computational forensic software (CFS) -- automated decision systems that the government uses to convict and incarcerate, such as facial recognition, gunshot detection, and probabilistic genotyping tools. We find that our participants faced challenges assessing and contesting CFS reliability due to difficulties (a) navigating how CFS is developed and used, (b) overcoming judges and jurors' non-critical perceptions of CFS, and (c) gathering CFS expertise. To conclude, we provide recommendations that center the technical, social, and institutional context to better position interventions such as performance evaluations to support contestability in practice.
title (Beyond) Reasonable Doubt: Challenges that Public Defenders Face in Scrutinizing AI in Court
topic Computers and Society
Artificial Intelligence
Human-Computer Interaction
K.4.0
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.13004