美国宪法如何制约AI模型许可与研究分类的监管设计
Constitutional Law and AI Governance: Constraints on Model Licensing and Research Classification
- 从第一、第四修正案出发分析AI监管的法律边界
- 政府需明确定义开发者对模型的法律权益才能合规
- 政策制定者须兼顾法律约束与实际治理需求
具有颠覆性风险的生成式AI系统可能带来前所未有的灾难性后果，但美国宪法对政府监管此类技术的能力施加了重大限制。本文分析第一修正案、行政法以及第十四修正案如何影响两项监管提案——模型许可和人工智能研究分类的法律可行性。尽管第一修正案可能为模型算法或输出提供一定保护，但这并不排除监管的可能；同时，行政机关审查与授权机制也需符合行政法要求。此外，实质正当程序与平等保护条款构成的障碍较小，但程序正当程序要求政府必须清晰界定开发者在何种情况下对模型拥有法律利益。因此，有效的AI治理需要谨慎实施，以规避上述法律挑战。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Transformative AI systems may pose unprecedented catastrophic risks, but the U.S. Constitution places significant constraints on the government's ability to govern this technology. This paper examines how the First Amendment, administrative law, and the Fourteenth Amendment shape the legal vulnerability of two regulatory proposals: model licensing and AI research classification. While the First Amendment may provide some degree of protection for model algorithms or outputs, this protection does not foreclose regulation. Policymakers must also consider administrative legal requirements, due to both agency review and authority. Finally, while substantive due process and equal protection pose minimal obstacles, procedural due process requires the government to clearly define when developers vest a legal interest in their models. Given this analysis, effective AI governance requires careful implementation to avoid these legal challenges.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。