PlumX Metrics
SSRN
Embed PlumX Metrics

Rethinking the Fourth Amendment in the Age of Supercomputers, Artificial Intelligence, and Robots

West Virginia Law Review, Vol. 119, No. 101, 2017
2017
  • 0
    Citations
  • 2,816
    Usage
  • 2
    Captures
  • 2
    Mentions
  • 0
    Social Media
Metric Options:   Counts1 Year3 Year

Metrics Details

  • Usage
    2,816
    • Abstract Views
      2,337
    • Downloads
      479
  • Captures
    2
    • Readers
      2
      • SSRN
        2
  • Mentions
    2
    • Blog Mentions
      1
      • Blog
        1
    • News Mentions
      1
      • News
        1
  • Ratings
    • Download Rank
      119,735

Most Recent News

Automatic Justice: Shaping the Legal Mind of Tomorrow

Smart computing is changing the nature of legal work even as the profession struggles to understand its scope. Machines sophisticated enough to communicate intelligibly and

Paper Description

Law enforcement currently uses cognitive computers to conduct predictive and content analytics and manage information contained in large police data files. These big data analytics and insight capabilities are more effective than using traditional investigative tools and save law enforcement time and a significant amount of financial and personnel resources. It is not farfetched to think law enforcement’s use of cognitive computing will extend to using thinking, real-time robots in the field in the not-so-distant future. IBM’s Watson currently uses its artificial intelligence to suggest medical diagnoses and treatment in the healthcare industry and assists the finance industry in improving investment decisions. IBM and similar companies already offer predictive analytics and cognitive computing programs to law enforcement for real-time intelligence and investigative purposes. This article will explore the consequences of predictive and content analytics and the future of cognitive computing, such as utilizing “robots” such as an imaginary “Officer Joe Roboto” in the law enforcement context. Would our interactions with Officer Joe Roboto trigger the same Fourth Amendment concerns and protections as those when dealing with a flesh-and-blood police officer? Are we more afraid of a “robotic” Watson, its capabilities, and lack of feeling and biases, compared to a human law enforcement officer? Assuming someday in the future we might be able to solve the physical limitations of a robot, would a “robotic” officer be preferable to a human one? What sort of limitations would we place on such technology? This article attempts to explore the ramifications of using such computers/robots in the future. Autonomous robots with artificial intelligence and the widespread use of predictive analytics are the future tools of law enforcement in a digital age, and we must come up with solutions as to how to handle the appropriate use of these tools.

Bibliographic Details

Melanie Reid

robots; Fourth Amendment

Provide Feedback

Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know