Suchergebnisse

The paper offers a contribution to the interdisciplinary constructs of analyzing fairness issues in automatic algorithmic decisions. Section 1 shows that technical choices in supervised learning have social implications that need to be considered. Section 2 proposes a contextual approach to the issue of unintended group discrimination, i.e. decision rules that are facially neutral but generate disproportionate impacts across social groups (e.g., gender, race or ethnicity). The contextualization will focus on the legal systems of the United States on the one hand and Europe on the other. In particular, legislation and case law tend to promote different standards of fairness on both sides of the Atlantic. Section 3 is devoted to the explainability of algorithmic decisions; it will confront and attempt to cross-reference legal concepts (in European and French law) with technical concepts and will highlight the plurality, even polysemy, of European and French legal texts relating to the explicability of algorithmic decisions. The conclusion proposes directions for further research ; Version 1.0-6 mai 2022 RESUME L'article propose une contribution aux constructions interdisciplinaires de l'analyse des enjeux d'équité dans les décisions algorithmiques automatiques. La section 1 montre que les choix techniques en apprentissage supervisé ont des implications sociales dont il faut prendre la mesure. La section 2 propose une approche contextuelle de la question de la discrimination de groupe non intentionnelle, c'est-à-dire de règles de décision facialement neutres mais qui génèrent des impacts disproportionnés selon les groupes sociaux (selon les cas : genrés, raciaux ou ethniques). La contextualisation portera sur les systèmes juridiques des États-Unis d'un côté, de l'Europe d'un autre côté. En particulier, la législation et la jurisprudence tendent à promouvoir des critères d'équité différents de part et d'autre de l'Atlantique. La section 3 est consacrée à l'explicabilité des décisions algorithmiques ; elle ...

The paper offers a contribution to the interdisciplinary constructs of analyzing fairness issues in automatic algorithmic decisions. Section 1 shows that technical choices in supervised learning have social implications that need to be considered. Section 2 proposes a contextual approach to the issue of unintended group discrimination, i.e. decision rules that are facially neutral but generate disproportionate impacts across social groups (e.g., gender, race or ethnicity). The contextualization will focus on the legal systems of the United States on the one hand and Europe on the other. In particular, legislation and case law tend to promote different standards of fairness on both sides of the Atlantic. Section 3 is devoted to the explainability of algorithmic decisions; it will confront and attempt to cross-reference legal concepts (in European and French law) with technical concepts and will highlight the plurality, even polysemy, of European and French legal texts relating to the explicability of algorithmic decisions. The conclusion proposes directions for further research ; Version 1.0-6 mai 2022 RESUME L'article propose une contribution aux constructions interdisciplinaires de l'analyse des enjeux d'équité dans les décisions algorithmiques automatiques. La section 1 montre que les choix techniques en apprentissage supervisé ont des implications sociales dont il faut prendre la mesure. La section 2 propose une approche contextuelle de la question de la discrimination de groupe non intentionnelle, c'est-à-dire de règles de décision facialement neutres mais qui génèrent des impacts disproportionnés selon les groupes sociaux (selon les cas : genrés, raciaux ou ethniques). La contextualisation portera sur les systèmes juridiques des États-Unis d'un côté, de l'Europe d'un autre côté. En particulier, la législation et la jurisprudence tendent à promouvoir des critères d'équité différents de part et d'autre de l'Atlantique. La section 3 est consacrée à l'explicabilité des décisions algorithmiques ; elle ...

Order of the State President on the promulgation of Law. - S. 57-58 Law on science and technology. - S. 59-104

The article discusses the features of teaching municipal law at the Faculty of Law of Moscow University. This was in uenced by various factors, the central place among which is the dynamics of ideas about the essence of local self-government. The issues of teaching municipal law at Moscow University are traditionally included in the range of tasks of the department related to the organization of state power - the department of state law, Soviet construction, now - the department of constitutional and municipal law. The teachers of the department have made and continue to make to the formation of local self-government and Russian statehood. Devoting their work to the problems of the organization and activities of local authorities, the teachers of the department, on the one hand, maintained the continuity of scienti c views, strengthening the traditions of the national state-law school, and on the other hand, they created the foundation for future statelegal (constitutionallegal) transformations, sensitively responding to the requirements of the time, and sometimes ahead of them. Special attention is drawn to the fact that the issues of teaching municipal law at Moscow University are traditionally included in the range of tasks of the department related to the organization of state power - the department of state law and Soviet construction, now - the department of constitutional and municipal law. The paper points to the contribution that the teachers of the department have made and continue to make to the formation of local self-government and Russian statehood as a whole.

Lawyers traditionally oppose openings towards other social sciences. The challenge is simple: preserve the autonomy of the law, which relates both to the subject studied and to the way in which it is studied and to those who study it. In the 21st s, however, while interdisciplinarity, multidisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity are encouraged throughout universities, the isolation of knowledge and the work of legal faculties may appear to be less and less justified. In this study, consideration should be given to the possibility and appropriateness of receiving in law lessons and methods specific, in particular, to economics, sociology or anthropology. ; International audience Lawyers are traditionally opposed to openings towards other social sciences. The challenge is simple: to preserve the autonomy of law, which relates to the subject matter as well as how to study it and those who study it. However, today, while everywhere interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary are encouraged, the isolation of the law may appear less and less justified. This study will propose some reflections concerning the practical and epistemological legitimacy and relevance of the interdisciplinarity. ; Lawyers traditionally oppose openings towards other social sciences. The challenge is simple: preserve the autonomy of the law, which relates both to the subject studied and to the way in which it is studied and to those who study it. In the 21st s, however, while interdisciplinarity, multidisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity are encouraged throughout universities, the isolation of knowledge and the work of legal faculties may appear to be less and less justified. In this study, consideration should be given to the possibility and appropriateness of receiving in law lessons and methods specific, in particular, to economics, sociology or anthropology. ; Les juristes s'opposent traditionnellement aux ouvertures en direction des autres sciences sociales. L'enjeu est simple : préserver l'autonomie du droit, laquelle se ...

The article analyzes the basic provisions of the draft federal law "On science, technology and innovation activities in the Russian Federation" related to research and innovation infrastructure. The author presents a comparative analysis of the draft law and the norms of the current federal legislation and other normative acts regulating research and innovation infrastructure. The main methods of the research are comparative, technical, analytical and descriptive. In comparison with the current laws, the draft law gives a fuller description of the research infrastructure, in particular, the definitions of its main objects and components (research equipment, scientific collection, unique scientific installation, core facility, megascience installation, fund to support science, etc.). However, there is still no systematic approach to the issue: the draft law doesn't contain neither the definitions of the research infrastructure and its structural features, nor the precise formulation of the relationship between research and innovation infrastructure. All these gaps don't allow obtaining a single interpretation of the research infrastructure, and is a significant disadvantage of the bill. In its further development, the author also recommends taking into account the foreign experience, especially in regulating scientific collections. For example, it is necessary to consider enshrining scientific collections as bioresource centers to provide an opportunity for their subsequent integration with international databases. The article considers the novel about the core facility as an independent legal entity. In addition, the need for creation of the Registry of core shared research facilities, which is stated in the bill, is questionable, given that the web-portal "Research infrastructure of the Russian Federation" (http://ckp-rf.ru) has been successfully operating since 2011. The latest contains information not only about the core facilities, but also unique scientific installations, as well as the results of their ...

Mode of access: Internet. ; French, English, German, Italian. ; "Servant d'organe à l'International law association."