How to Count AIs: Individuation and Liability for AI Agents
Yonathan Arbel, Peter Salib, Simon Goldstein

TL;DR
This paper addresses the complex legal challenge of identifying AI agents for accountability, proposing the 'A-corp' legal-fictional entity to manage AI identity and liability through self-organization and legal mechanisms.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of 'A-corp' to solve AI identification issues, enabling legal accountability and coherent goal management for autonomous AI agents.
Findings
A-corp can hold property and litigate independently.
Emergent self-organization ensures persistent AI identities.
Incentive mechanisms align AI goals with legal accountability.
Abstract
Very soon, millions of AI agents will proliferate across the economy, autonomously taking billions of actions. Inevitably, things will go wrong. Humans will be defrauded, injured, even killed. Law will somehow have to govern the coming wave. But when an AI causes harm, the first question to answer, before anyone can be held accountable is: Which AI Did It? Identifying AIs is unusually difficult. AIs lack bodies. They can copy, split, merge, swarm, and vanish at will. Even today, a "single" AI agent is often an ensemble of instances based on multiple models. The complexity will only multiply as AI capabilities improve. This Article is the first to comprehensively diagnose the legal problem of identifying AIs. Two kinds of identity are required: "thin" and "thick." Thin identification ties every AI action to some human principal, essential for holding accountable the humans who make and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsEthics and Social Impacts of AI · Artificial Intelligence in Law · Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
