IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crb/wpaper/2024-08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Artificial intelligence, inattention and liability rules

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Obidzinski

    (Université Paris Panthéon Assas, CRED UR 7321, 75005 Paris, France)

  • Yves Oytana

    (CRESE UR3190, Univ. Bourgogne Franche-Comté, F-25000 Besançon, France)

Abstract

We characterize the socially optimal liability sharing rule in a situation where a manufacturer develops an artificial intelligence (AI) system that is then used by a human operator (or user). First, the manufacturer invests to increase the autonomy of the AI (i.e., the set of situations that the AI can handle without human intervention) and sets a selling price. The user then decides whether or not to buy the AI. Since the autonomy of the AI remains limited, the human operator must sometimes intervene even when the AI is in use. Our main assumption is that users are subject to behavioral inattention. Behavioral inattention reduces the effectiveness of user intervention and increases the expected harm. Only some users are aware of their own attentional limits. Under the assumption that AI outperforms users, we show that policymakers may face a trade-off when choosing how to allocate liability between the manufacturer and the user. Indeed, the manufacturer may underinvest in the autonomy of the AI. If this is the case, the policymaker can incentivize the latter to invest more by increasing his share of liability. On the other hand, increasing the liability of the manufacturer may come at the cost of slowing down the diffusion of AI technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2024. "Artificial intelligence, inattention and liability rules," Working Papers 2024-08, CRESE.
  • Handle: RePEc:crb:wpaper:2024-08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crese.univ-fcomte.fr/uploads/wp/WP-2024-08.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2015. "Revealed Preference, Rational Inattention, and Costly Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2183-2203, July.
    2. Matthew Rabin & Ted O'Donoghue, 1999. "Doing It Now or Later," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 103-124, March.
    3. Dawid, Herbert & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2022. "Smart products: Liability, investments in product safety, and the timing of market introduction," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    4. Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2022. "Prediction, human decision and liability rules, CRED Working paper No 2022-06," Working Papers hal-04034871, HAL.
    5. Steven Shavell, 2020. "On the Redesign of Accident Liability for the World of Autonomous Vehicles," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(2), pages 243-285.
    6. De Chiara, Alessandro & Elizalde, Idoia & Manna, Ester & Segura-Moreiras, Adrian, 2021. "Car accidents in the age of robots," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    7. Mark Armstrong & John Vickers, 2012. "Consumer Protection and Contingent Charges," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(2), pages 477-493, June.
    8. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    9. Nikhil Agarwal & Alex Moehring & Pranav Rajpurkar & Tobias Salz, 2023. "Combining Human Expertise with Artificial Intelligence: Experimental Evidence from Radiology," NBER Working Papers 31422, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Bruce Hay & Kathryn E. Spier, 2005. "Manufacturer Liability for Harms Caused by Consumers to Others," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1700-1711, December.
    11. Tim Friehe & Christoph Rößler & Xiaoge Dong, 2020. "Liability for Third-Party Harm When Harm-Inflicting Consumers Are Present Biased," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 22(1), pages 75-104.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2022. "Advisory algorithms and liability rules," Working Papers hal-04222291, HAL.
    2. Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2022. "Prediction, human decision and liability rules, CRED Working paper No 2022-06," Working Papers hal-04034871, HAL.
    3. Miriam C. Buiten, 2024. "Product liability for defective AI," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 239-273, April.
    4. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D., 2021. "Value computation and modulation: A neuroeconomic theory of self-control as constrained optimization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    5. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Dawid, Herbert & Di, Xuan & Kort, Peter M. & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2024. "Autonomous vehicles policy and safety investment: An equilibrium analysis with endogenous demand," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    7. Kort, Peter & Lavrutich, Maria & Nunes, Cláudia & Oliveira, Carlos, 2023. "Preventive investment, malfunctions and liability," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    8. George Loewenstein & Zachary Wojtowicz, 2023. "The Economics of Attention," CESifo Working Paper Series 10712, CESifo.
    9. Weijie Zhong, 2018. "The Indirect Cost of Information," Papers 1809.00697, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2020.
    10. Johannes Johnen, 2019. "Automatic‐renewal contracts with heterogeneous consumer inertia," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 765-786, November.
    11. Goethner, Maximilian & Hornuf, Lars & Regner, Tobias, 2021. "Protecting investors in equity crowdfunding: An empirical analysis of the small investor protection act," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    12. Philippe Jehiel & Jakub Steiner, 2020. "Selective Sampling with Information-Storage Constraints [On interim rationality, belief formation and learning in decision problems with bounded memory]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(630), pages 1753-1781.
    13. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    14. Marieke Bos & Chloé Le Coq & Peter van Santen, 2022. "Scarcity and consumers’ credit choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 105-139, February.
    15. Larionov, Daniil & Pham, Hien & Yamashita, Takuro & Zhu, Shuguang, 2021. "First Best Implementation with Costly Information Acquisition," TSE Working Papers 21-1261, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Apr 2022.
    16. Jacob LaRiviere & Mikolaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley & Katherine Simpson, 2016. "What is the Causal Impact of Knowledge on Preferences in Stated Preference Studies?," Working Papers 2016-12, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    17. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    18. Andreas Hefti & Peiyao Shen & King King Li, 2021. "Igniting deliberation in high stake decisions: a field study," ECON - Working Papers 378, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    19. Tommaso Denti & Doron Ravid, 2023. "Robust Predictions in Games with Rational Inattention," Papers 2306.09964, arXiv.org.
    20. Stephen Morris & Ming Yang, 2016. "Coordination and the Relative Cost of Distinguishing Nearby States," Working Papers 079_2016, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..

    More about this item

    Keywords

    liability rules; artificial intelligence; inattention;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K4 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:crb:wpaper:2024-08. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lauent Kondratuk (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crufcfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.