Hệ thống Vũ khí Tự động và Kiểm soát Nhân loại Có Ý nghĩa: Các Vấn đề Đạo đức và Pháp lý

Rudakevych P, Ciholas M. PackBot EOD firing system. SPIE Proceedings, Volume 5804, Unmanned Ground Vehicle Technology VII. 2005.

Egozi A. Robotics: Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) ground robotic systems. Asia-Pac Defence Rep. 2016;42(7):46–7.

Wells P, Deguire D. TALON: a universal unmanned ground vehicle platform, enabling the mission to be the focus. SPIE Proceedings, Volume 5804, Unmanned Ground Vehicle Technology VII. 2005.

Visnevski NA, Castillo-Effen M. A UAS capability description framework: reactive, adaptive, and cognitive capabilities in robotics. 2009 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana. 2009.

Alston P. Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. Addendum. Study on targeted killings. UN Doc. A/HRC/14/24/Add.6. 28 May 2010.

O’Connell ME. The choice of law against terrorism. J Natl Sec Law Policy. 2009;4:343–68.

Melzer N. Human rights implications of the usage of drones and unmanned robots in warfare. Report requested by the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights. EXPO/B/DROI/2012/12. May 2013.

•• US Department of Defense. Directive 3000.09 “Autonomy in Weapons Systems”. 21 November 2012. The Directive crucially contributed to the AWS debate by introducing a workable definition of AWS and by establishing the principle that “appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force” should always be ensured over weapons systems.

International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Views on autonomous weapon system. Paper submitted to the Informal meeting of experts on lethal autonomous weapons systems of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), Geneva. 11 April 2016.

Campaign to Stop Killer Robots. Urgent Action Needed to Ban Fully Autonomous Weapons. Press release. 23 April 2013.

Boulanin V, Verbruggen N. Mapping the development of autonomy in weapon systems. Solna: SIPRI Report; 2017.

Stoner RH. R2D2 with attitude: the story of the Phalanx Close-In weapons. 2009. Available at: www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-103.htm.

NBS MANTIS Air Defence Protection System. Available at: https://www.army-technology.com/projects/mantis/.

Landau EB, Bermant A. Iron Dome protection: missile defense in Israel’s security concept. In: Kurz A, Brom S, editors. The lessons of operation protective edge. Tel Aviv: Institute for National Security Studies; 2014. p. 37–42.

30 mm (1.2″) Goalkeeper SGE-30. Available at: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNNeth_30mm_Goalkeeper.php.

SAAB Group. LEDS full spectrum active protection for land vehicles Available at: https://saab.com/globalassets/commercial/land/force-protection/active-protection/leds/leds-product-sheet.pdf.

Trophy Active Protection System; 10 April 2007. Available at: https://defense-update.com/20070410_trophy-2.html.

Parkin S. Killer Robots: the soldiers that never sleep. BBC Future; 16 July 2015. Available at: www.bbc.com/future/story/20150715-killer-robots-the-soldiers-that-never-sleep.

UK Royal Air Force. Aircraft & weapons. 2007: p. 87.

Gettinger D, Michel AH. Loitering munitions. Center for the Study of the Drone; 2017.

Scharre P. Robotics on the battlefield part II. The coming swarm. Center for a New American Security; October 2014.

Brehm M, De Courcy Wheele A. Swarms. Article36 discussion paper for the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), Geneva. March 2019.

Verbruggen M. The question of swarms control: challenges to ensuring human control over military swarms. Non-Proliferation and Disarmament Paper No. 65; December 2019.

Ekelhof MAC, Persi Paoli G. Swarm robotics: technical and operational overview of the next generation of autonomous systems. United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR); 2020.

Amoroso D. Autonomous Weapons Systems and International Law. A study on human-machine interactions in ethically and legally sensitive domains. Naples/Baden-Baden: ESI/Nomos; 2020.

Roff HM, Moyes R. Meaningful Human Control, Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Weapons. Article36 briefing paper prepared for the CCW informal meeting of experts on lethal autonomous weapons systems. April 2016.

Moyes R. Key elements of meaningful human control. Article 36 Background paper to comments prepared for the CCW Informal Meeting of Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems. April 2016.

•• Arkin RC. Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2009. Arkin’s book represents the first—and, so far, the best articulated—attempt by a roboticist to argue for the desirability of AWS from an ethical and legal perspective. It deeply influenced the subsequent debate by providing major military powers with a convenient argument to assert the legality of AWS.

Arkin RC. Lethal autonomous systems and the plight of the non-combatant. AISB Quarterly. 2013;137:1–9.

Arkin RC. A roboticist’s perspective on lethal autonomous weapon systems. In: Perspectives on lethal autonomous weapon systems. UNODA Occasional Papers No 30; November 2017: p. 35–47.

Sharkey NE. Automated killers and the computing profession. Computer. 2007;40(11):122–3.

Sharkey NE. Cassandra or false prophet of doom: AI robots and war. IEEE Intell Syst. 2008;23(4):14–7.

Sharkey NE. Saying ‘no!’ to lethal autonomous targeting. J Military Ethics. 2010;9(4):369–83.

• Sharkey NE. The evitability of autonomous robot warfare. Int Rev Red Cross. 2012;94:787–9 This article provides the most comprehensive outline, from a roboticist’s perspective, of the ethical and legal concerns raised by autonomy in weapons systems.

Autonomous weapons: an open letter from AI & robotics researchers. 28 July 2015. Available at: https://futureoflife.org/open-letter-autonomous-weapons/?cn-reloaded=1.

Human Rights Watch. Stopping Killer Robots. Country Positions on Banning Fully Autonomous Weapons and Retaining Human Control. August 2020.

Final Report of the 2019 Meeting of the high contracting parties to the CCW. UN Doc CCW/MSP/2019/CRP2/Rev1, Annex III 15 November 2019.

•• Heyns C. Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. UN Doc. A/HRC/23/47. 9 April 2013. Heyns’ report is a milestone in the AWS debate: it raised awareness within the United Nations as to the ethical and legal implications of autonomy in weapons systems, by illustrating—concisely, but also comprehensively—the main normative issues at stake.

Schmitt MN, Thurnher JS. “Out of the loop”: autonomous weapon systems and the law of armed conflict. Harvard Natl Secur J. 2013;4:231–81.

Sassòli M. Autonomous weapons and international humanitarian law: advantages, open technical questions and legal issues to be clarified. Int Law Stud. 2014;90:308–40.

Anderson K, Waxman M. Debating autonomous weapon systems, their ethics, and their regulation under international law. In: Brownsword R, Scotford E, Yeung F, editors. The Oxford handbook of law, regulation, and technology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2017. p. 1097–117.

Krupyi T. Of souls, spirits and ghosts: transposing the application of the rules of targeting to lethal autonomous robots. Melbourne J Int Law. 2015;16(1):145–202.

Brehm M. Defending the boundary: constraints and requirements on the use of autonomous weapon systems under international humanitarian and human rights law. Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, Academy briefing No. 9: May 2017.

Geiss R, Lahmann H. Autonomous weapons systems: a paradigm shift for the law of armed conflict? In: Ohlin JD, editor. Research handbook on remote warfare. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing; 2017. p. 371–404.

• Sparrow R. Killer robots. J Appl Philos. 2007;24(1):62–77 Interested readers find here a first, ground-breaking illustration of the risk that increasing autonomy in weapons system creates “accountability gaps” in case of unlawful targeting decisions.

Amoroso D, Giordano B. Who is to blame for autonomous weapons systems’ misdoings? In: Lazzerini N, Carpanelli E, editors. Use and misuse of new technologies. Contemporary Challenges in International and European Law. The Hague: Springer; 2019. p. 211–32.

McDougall C. Autonomous weapon systems and accountability: putting the cart before the horse. Melbourne J Int Law. 2019;20(1):58–87.

Asaro P. On banning autonomous weapon systems: human rights, automation, and the dehumanization of lethal decision-making. Int Rev Red Cross. 2012;94:687–709.

Leveringhaus A. Ethics and autonomous weapons. London: Palgrave; 2016.

Heyns C. Autonomous weapons in armed conflict and the right to a dignified life: an African perspective. South African J Hum Rights. 2017;33(1):46–71.

Birnbacher D. Are Autonomous weapons systems a threat to human dignity? In: Bhuta N, et al., editors. Autonomous weapons systems. Law, ethics, policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016. p. 105–21.

Altmann J, Sauer F. Autonomous weapon systems and strategic stability. Survival. 2017;59(5):117–42.

•• Scharre P. Army of none. Autonomous weapons and the future of war. New York/London: W.W. Norton; 2018. This volume represents one of the few book-size studies taking stock of the discussion and attempting to delineate workable solutions to the problems raised by autonomy in weapons systems. As an added value, it has been written by a key-actor in the AWS debate, since Scharre coordinated the Drafting process that eventually brought about the US DoD Directive 3000.09.

ICRC. Ethics and autonomous weapon systems: an ethical basis for human control? Working paper submitted to the Group of Governmental Experts on lethal autonomous weapons of the CCW, Geneva. UN Doc. CCW/GGE.1/2018/WP.5. 29 March 2018.

International Panel on the Regulation of Autonomous Weapons (iPRAW). Focus on Human Control. August 2019.

Dutch Advisory Council on International Affairs (AIV) and Advisory Committee on Issues of Public International Law (CAVV). Report on Autonomous weapon systems: the need for meaningful human control. No. 97 AIV / No. 26 CAVV. 2015.

Roorda M. NATO’s targeting process: ensuring human control over and lawful use of ‘autonomous’ weapons. In: Williams A, Scharre P, editors. Autonomous systems: issues for defence policymakers. The Hague: NATO Communications and Information Agency; 2015. p. 152–68.

Ekelhof MAC. Moving beyond semantics on autonomous weapons systems: meaningful human control in operation. Glob Policy. 2019;10(3):343–8.

Akerson D. The illegality of offensive lethal autonomy. In: Saxon D, editor. International humanitarian law and the changing technology of war. Leiden/Boston: Brill/Nijhoff; 2013. p. 65–98.

Chengeta T. Defining the emerging notion of ‘meaningful human control’ in autonomous weapon systems. New York J Int Law Politics. 2017;49:833–90.

Horowitz MC, Scharre P. Meaningful human control in weapon systems: a primer, CNAS Working Paper, March 2015.

International Committee for Robot Arms Control. Statement on technical issues. Informal meeting of experts on lethal autonomous weapons, Geneva. 14 May 2014.

Schwarz E. The (Im)possibility of meaningful human control for lethal autonomous weapon systems. Humanitarian Law & Policy (Blog of the ICRC). 29 August 2018.

Skitka LJ, Mosier KL, Burdick M. Does automation bias decision-making? Int J Hum-Comput Stud. 1999;51(5):991–1006.

United States. Human-machine interaction in the development, deployment and use of emerging technologies in the area of lethal autonomous weapons systems. Working paper submitted to the Group of Governmental Experts on lethal autonomous weapons of the CCW, Geneva. UN Doc. CCW/GGE.2/2018/WP.4. 28 August 2018.

SAE International. Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. 15 June 2018. Available at: https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201806/.

Yang G-Z et al. Medical robotics – regulatory, ethical, and legal considerations for increasing levels of autonomy. Sci Robot. 2017:2(4).

DNV GL. Autonomous and remotely operated ships. September 2018.

•• Sharkey NE. Staying the Loop: human supervisory control of weapons. In: Bhuta N, et al., editors. Autonomous weapons systems. Law, ethics, policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016. p. 23–38. Sharkey’s chapter offers a valuable comparison of strengths and weaknesses of human and machine decision-making processes, paying particular attention to implications for autonomous robotics in military applications. Also, by providing a clear taxonomy of possible forms of human-weapon partnership, it laid the groundwork for subsequent research on MHC.

Cummings ML. Automation and accountability in decision support system interface design. J Technol Stud. 2006:23–31.

Switzerland. A “compliance-based” approach to autonomous weapon systems. Working paper submitted to the Group of Governmental Experts on lethal autonomous weapons of the CCW, Geneva. UN Doc. CCW/GGE.1/2017/WP.9. 10 November 2017.

United States. Statement for the General Exchange of Views. Group of Governmental Experts on lethal autonomous weapons of the CCW, Geneva. 9 April 2018.

Israel. Statement on Agenda Item 6(d). Group of Governmental Experts on lethal autonomous weapons of the CCW, Geneva. 29 August 2018.

Amoroso D, Tamburrini G. What makes human control over weapon systems “meaningful”? ICRAC working paper #4. August 2019.

Amoroso D, Tamburrini G. Filling the empty box: a principled approach to meaningful human control over weapons systems. ESIL Reflections. 2019:8(5).

Santoni de Sio F, Van Den Hoven J. Meaningful human control over autonomous systems: a philosophical account. Front Robotic AI. 2018.

Mecacci G, Santoni de Sio F. Meaningful human control as reason-responsiveness: the case of dual-mode vehicles. Ethics Inf Technol. 2020;22:103–15.

Ficuciello F, et al. Autonomy in surgical robots and its meaningful human control. Paladyn J Behav Robot. 2019;10(1):30–43.