Algorithms and Transparency in View of the New General Data Protection Regulation

Temme, M.I.

doi:10.21552/edpl/2017/4/9

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…With the GDPR being relatively recently adopted, the discussion concerning the interpretation and scope of the right to explanation is still ongoing. An early analysis comes from Temme (2017), who criticises the regulation for insufficiently addressing the challenges to render algorithms more transparent, questions the legal basis of the right to explanation, and points out that even if legally binding, its scope is very limited. Wachter et al (2017) are also sceptical about the right to explanation and argue that it does not exist in the GDPR.…”

Section: Legal Literature On the Gdpr Right To Explanationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining automated decision-making: a multinational study of the GDPR right to meaningful information

Dexe

Franke

Söderlund

et al. 2022

Geneva Pap Risk Insur Issues Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) establishes a right for individuals to get access to information about automated decision-making based on their personal data. However, the application of this right comes with caveats. This paper investigates how European insurance companies have navigated these obstacles. By recruiting volunteering insurance customers, requests for information about how insurance premiums are set were sent to 26 insurance companies in Denmark, Finland, The Netherlands, Poland and Sweden. Findings illustrate the practice of responding to GDPR information requests and the paper identifies possible explanations for shortcomings and omissions in the responses. The paper also adds to existing research by showing how the wordings in the different language versions of the GDPR could lead to different interpretations. Finally, the paper discusses what can reasonably be expected from explanations in consumer oriented information.

show abstract

Section: Legal Literature On the Gdpr Right To Explanationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining automated decision-making: a multinational study of the GDPR right to meaningful information

Dexe

Franke

Söderlund

et al. 2022

Geneva Pap Risk Insur Issues Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this case, if the person exits their contract with the provider and requests erasure, the provider simply needs to destroy all files relating to this person and not necessary for the fulfilment of contractual obligations with another person (e.g., if the two persons were parties to the same claim and only one exited their contract). The situation becomes less clear when the data concerned is used in a less straightforward and more opaque way (Temme, 2017), by an AIbased system. This is explained by referring to the conclusion the authors reached when discussing the definition of 'data processing'.…”

Section: Compliance With the Right To Erasurementioning

confidence: 99%

Artificial Intelligence and the GDPR: Inevitable Nemeses?

Kesa¹,

Kerikmäe

2020

TalTech Journal of European Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid development of computer technology over the past decades has brought about countless benefits across industries and social benefits as well—constant interpersonal connectivity is facilitated through numerous communication channels and social media outlets, energy-producing enterprises employ complex machinery management systems for increased efficiency, ease of access and safety, hedge funds make use of high-frequency trading algorithms to engage in trades happening at a fraction of a second, while medical professionals use predictive technologies to diagnose diseases and forecast viral outbreaks. Widespread adoption of technology necessitated the creation of regulatory frameworks that would ensure the safeguarding of rights and regulatory and judicial supervision over the exploitation of high technology. one such framework is the Gdpr, created due to the need for a comprehensive, contemporary legal regime governing the processing of personal data in a time when such data has become a commodity that is traded and sold in return for services or financial gain. However, in the authors’ view, the Gdpr suffers in terms of efficacy in the context of artificial intelligence-based technologies, and full compliance of data controllers and processors employing such technologies is unlikely to be achieved, particularly in regards to the right to information, the general principle of transparency and the right to erasure. The article provides an overview of these issues, including a discussion on the movement towards a regime of data ownership, and proposes legislative amendments as an effective method of mitigating these drawbacks.

show abstract

“…Incluso la sucesiva Comunicación de la Comisión Europea del 25 de abril de 2018 sobre "Inteligencia artificial para Europa" 144 se centra en poner la IA al servicio del hombre 145 . De hecho, tras definir la IA como un conjunto de "sistemas que manifiestan un comportamiento inteligente, pues son capaces de analizar su entorno y pasar a la acción -con cierto grado de autonomía-con el fin de alcanzar objetivos específicos" 146 , aclara que la Unión Europea tiene que garantizar un marco ético y jurídico que tutele los derechos y las libertades fundamentales de los ciudadanos en el plano económico y social y que respete los principios de transparencia y responsabilidad 147 .…”

Section: Experiencias Y Modelos Probabilísticos En El Marco De Launclassified

La decisión robótica: algoritmos, interpretación y justicia predictiva

Battelli¹

2020

derpri

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A pesar de los riesgos de las decisiones robóticas, la previsibilidad y la justicia predictiva pueden ser consideradas como oportunidades para prever el resultado del juicio mediante el uso de algoritmos. El presente estudio nace a partir de una pregunta: ¿un juez puede ser reemplazado por un robot? La tesis propuesta es que la decisión robótica, así como la humana, puede contener errores y que las decisiones robóticas no podrán considerarse “justas”, incluso cuando son lógicamente “correctas”, ya que no existen máquinas infalibles. Sin embargo, se debería evaluar positivamente que la automatización del proceso decisorio permite lograr ventajas significativas en términos de uniformidad, fiabilidad y capacidad de control adecuado de la decisión robla de.

show abstract

Algorithms and Transparency in View of the New General Data Protection Regulation

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Explaining automated decision-making: a multinational study of the GDPR right to meaningful information

Explaining automated decision-making: a multinational study of the GDPR right to meaningful information

Artificial Intelligence and the GDPR: Inevitable Nemeses?

La decisión robótica: algoritmos, interpretación y justicia predictiva

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About