Proefschrift

89 3 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 3.7 CONCLUSION Accountability is a form of control and the notion of control can be viewed from different perspectives. In this chapter we describe the engineering perspective, the sociotechnical perspective and the governance perspective. Our main claim is that combining the control mechanisms in the technical, socio-technical and governance layer will lead to Comprehensive Human Oversight over Autonomous Weapon Systems which may ensure solid controllability and accountability for the behaviour of Autonomous Weapon Systems. These three perspectives on control constitute the three layers of our proposed Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework. The Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework highlights the connection between the layers and shows an existing gap in the governance layer. Current military control instruments cover the blocks of the Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework. However, when applied to the case of Autonomous Weapon Systems the Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework reveals two gaps in control, one gap in the governance layer and one in the socio-technical layer during deployment of an Autonomous Weapon System. The application of the Glass Box framework on the Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework could mitigate these gaps in control. The Glass Box framework is built around the black box (the autonomous drone or weapon system) with the Interpretation and the Observation stage which allows for a transparent human oversight process which ensures accountability for the deployment of an autonomous system. As this is a first attempt to implement the Glass Box framework in a practical manner further research is needed to validate the concept. A feedback process can close the loop from the accountability process after deployment of a weapon back to the interpretation stage before a next deployment of a weapon. The monitoring, responding and acting on the outcome of the review process can be done by an article 36 weapon review committee. Sharing best practices of weapon reviews (Sayler, 2021) could be beneficial to improve the feedback process. Nonetheless, a standard process is lacking and developing an international standard article 36 review process could ensure incorporating the obligations and recommendations in the next iteration of the interpretation stage of the Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework. The toy example described above shows that the Five-Point Systems feedback loop (Gigler et al., 2014) can be applied to the case of Autonomous Weapon System. The purpose of the feedback system from the accountability process during the review stage of the Comprehensive Human Oversight Framework is to ensure that the lessons and recommendations from the review stage will be incorporated in the interpretation stage before deployment of an Autonomous Weapon System in a next iteration.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw