Proefschrift

74 3 CHAPTER 3 Framework for Autonomous Weapon Systems there is no ongoing control mechanism in block 5 to control the specific actions that the Autonomous Weapon System takes to achieve its goal (a socio-technical accountability gap). On the one hand, fully executive autonomy inherently implies that the Autonomous Weapon System is autonomous in setting its means to achieve its goal independently from the human operator. On the other hand, even less-than fully Autonomous Weapon Systems may still present big challenges in allowing the human controller to have effective control and supervision. This may actually depend, among other things, on the extent to which the ex ante and ex post mechanisms of control over the human–machine interaction are sufficient to give the operator the relevant capacities and motivation to discharge her duties. At a broader level, this arguably also depends on the extent that the governance level can provide an acceptable level of control on the choice of weapons and the distribution of tasks and duties in the mission. To mitigate the governance and socio-technical accountability gaps, we applied the Glass Box framework- a framework for monitoring abstract values and translating them into observable elements - on the Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework. In section 3.4 we will describe the Glass Box framework before applying it to the Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework in section 3.5. 3.4 GLASS BOX FRAMEWORK As stated in section 3.1, based on our literature study, a mechanism in block 2 of the Comphrensive Human Oversight Framework appears to be missing indicating a gap in the governance layer. As an oversight process seems to be lacking, there is no sufficient mechanism for an institution to govern or supervise the ongoing control (block 5) of a system in the socio-technical layer. Next to this, introducing the notion of executive autonomy has implications for the applicability of military control instruments for Weapon Systems with different levels of autonomy, including fully Autonomous Weapon Systems (see section 3.3). This means that there is no ongoing control mechanism or instrument for fully Autonomous Weapon Systems to control these specific actions that the Autonomous Weapon System takes to achieve its goal during the deployment phase. To fill these gaps a mechanism is needed to monitor the compliance of norms to ensure accountability over autonomous systems. The Glass Box framework could serve as a mechanism to solve these gaps, because it monitors abstract values and translates them into observable elements. The Glass Box approach (Aler Tubella, Theodorou, Dignum, & Dignum, 2019) is a framework (see Figure 10) for monitoring adherence to the contextual interpretations of abstract values which focuses uniquely on the observable inputs and outputs of an intelligent system. Its focus on the observable aspects of the

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw