Radiologists in the regulation of the responsibilities of artificial intelligence applied to radiodiagnosis: Let's make it real.

Congress:

ECR 2020

Poster Number:

C-08440

Type:

Educational Exhibit

Keywords:

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Neural networks, Computer Applications-General, Education, Medico-legal issues, Education and training, Not applicable

Authors:

P. Sanz Bellon¹, A. Pérez Del Barrio ¹, P. Menéndez Fernández-Miranda¹, J. Domingo Pérez², L. Lloret Iglesias¹, D. Rodríguez González¹; ¹Santander/ES, ²Zaragoza/ES

DOI:

10.26044/ecr2020/C-08440

DOI-Link:

https://dx.doi.org/10.26044/ecr2020/C-08440

Fig. 1: The greater the autonomy of AI, the more diluted the responsibility between...

Fig. 2: The report approved in the European Parliament on February 16, 2017, includes...

Fig. 3: Depending on the point of view we interpret the existence and performance of...

Learning objectives

To analyze, in a practical way and oriented to radiodiagnosis, the new European laws regarding the performance and responsibility of the systems of Artificial Intelligence (AI) linked to the medical imagery. To adapt the legislative language, in order to familiarize residents and deputy diagnostic radiologists with legal concepts related to our field of knowledge.

Background

We can discern three independent parts within this area, each of which will be addressed and developed later: The legal status of AI systems does not clearly define their legal nature. So, given an erroneous diagnosis or suboptimal therapeutic management, they cannot be held responsible for their acts or omissions that cause damage to third parties; and it is impossible to determine who should be held liable. It is very important to reflect on the following fact (Fig. 1): Thegreater the autonomy of AI, the...

Findings and procedure details

Regarding the scope of civil liability, understood as the obligation to compensate for the damages caused by seeking to restore the victim's economic balance before the damage, autonomous robots cannot be held responsible for the acts or omissions that cause damages to third parties; since it is not possible to determine the part that has to take charge of the compensation, nor demand that it repair the damage caused, in the current legal framework. The legal status of AI systemsdoes not clearly define their legal...

Conclusion

It is important to ensure the homogeneity and ethics on the behavior of AI systems, given complex situations, through consensus. As the autonomy of these systems increases, we must review the rules and legal conditions to regulate the responsibility for acts or omissions.

Personal information and conflict of interest

P. Sanz Bellon; Santander/ES - nothing to disclose A. Pérez Del Barrio; Santander/ES - nothing to disclose P. Menéndez Fernández-Miranda; Santander/ES - nothing to disclose L. Lloret Iglesias; Santander/ES - nothing to disclose D. Rodríguez González; Santander/ES - nothing to disclose J. Domingo Pérez; Saragossa/ES - nothing to disclose

References

EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA). Ethical Aspects of Cyber-Physical Systems. PE 563.501 Santos MJ. Regulación legal de la robótica y la inteligencia artificial: Retos de futuro. Revista Jurídica de la Universidad de León, núm. 4, 2017, pp. 25-50. Kang B, Park J, Cho S, Lee M, Kim N, Min H et al (2013) Current status, challenges, policies, and bioethics of biobanks. Genomics Inform 11:211–217 Woodbridge M, Fagiolo G, O’Regan DP (2013) MRIdb: medical image management for biobank research. J Digit...