Autonomous weapons systems: a paradigm shift for the law of armed conflict?

@inproceedings{Geiss2017AutonomousWS,
  title={Autonomous weapons systems: a paradigm shift for the law of armed conflict?},
  author={Robin Geiss and Henning Lahmann},
  year={2017}
}
7 Citations

A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control

Meaningful Human Control (MHC) has been a consistent key term in legal debates concerning autonomous weapon systems (AWS), but its usefulness as a policy or lawmaking tool is limited due to a lack of

Chapter III The “Accountability Gap” Problem. Who is to Blame for Autonomous Weapons Systems’ Misdoings?

cription for AWS’ Misdoings. 2.1. The Unpredictability of Autonomous Machines. 2.2. The “Many Hands” Problem. – 3. Individual Criminal Responsibility. 3.1. Direct responsibility. 3.1.1. The

Autonomous Weapons Systems and International Law

Recent advances in robotics and AI have paved the way to robots autonomously performing a wide variety of tasks in ethically and legally sensitive domains. Among them, a prominent place is occupied

Autonomous Weapons Systems and Meaningful Human Control: Ethical and Legal Issues

To provide readers with a compact account of ongoing academic and diplomatic debates about autonomy in weapons systems, that is, about the moral and legal acceptability of letting a robotic

Who Is to Blame for Autonomous Weapons Systems’ Misdoings?

This Chapter analyses who (or what legal entity) should be held responsible for behaviours by Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS) that, were they enacted by a human agent, would qualify as