Regulating AI-Based Remote Biometric Identification. Investigating the Public Demand for Bans, Audits, and Public Database Registrations

Kimon Kieslich,Marco Lünich

2024-05-06

Abstract:AI is increasingly being used in the public sector, including public security. In this context, the use of AI-powered remote biometric identification (RBI) systems is a much-discussed technology. RBI systems are used to identify criminal activity in public spaces, but are criticised for inheriting biases and violating fundamental human rights. It is therefore important to ensure that such systems are developed in the public interest, which means that any technology that is deployed for public use needs to be scrutinised. While there is a consensus among business leaders, policymakers and scientists that AI must be developed in an ethical and trustworthy manner, scholars have argued that ethical guidelines do not guarantee ethical AI, but rather prevent stronger regulation of AI. As a possible counterweight, public opinion can have a decisive influence on policymakers to establish boundaries and conditions under which AI systems should be used -- if at all. However, we know little about the conditions that lead to regulatory demand for AI systems. In this study, we focus on the role of trust in AI as well as trust in law enforcement as potential factors that may lead to demands for regulation of AI technology. In addition, we explore the mediating effects of discrimination perceptions regarding RBI. We test the effects on four different use cases of RBI varying the temporal aspect (real-time vs. post hoc analysis) and purpose of use (persecution of criminals vs. safeguarding public events) in a survey among German citizens. We found that German citizens do not differentiate between the different modes of application in terms of their demand for RBI regulation. Furthermore, we show that perceptions of discrimination lead to a demand for stronger regulation, while trust in AI and trust in law enforcement lead to opposite effects in terms of demand for a ban on RBI systems.

Computers and Society

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The key problem that this paper attempts to solve is about the regulatory requirements of Remote Biometric Identification (RBI) and its influencing factors. Specifically, the author explores the following aspects:

1. **The public's regulatory requirements for different application scenarios of RBI technology**: The research aims to understand whether the public will put forward different regulatory requirements for RBI technology in different application scenarios (such as real - time analysis and post - hoc analysis, chasing criminals and ensuring the safety of public activities).

2. **The influence of discrimination perception**: The research examines how the public's views on the possible discrimination problems brought by RBI technology affect their demand for stricter regulation.

3. **The role of trust**: The research analyzes how the public's trust in AI technology and law - enforcement agencies affects their attitude towards RBI technology regulation.

4. **Trust and discrimination perception in different usage scenarios**: The research also explores how the public's sense of trust and discrimination perception change in different RBI application scenarios and how they further affect their support for regulatory measures.

### Research Background

With the wide application of AI technology in the public sector, especially in the field of public security, Remote Biometric Identification (RBI) has become a highly controversial topic. RBI systems identify individuals by analyzing biometric data (such as faces, fingerprints, etc.), and are usually used to monitor video recordings in public places. Although these systems are helpful for identifying criminal activities, they are also criticized for invading privacy, being biased and violating basic human rights. Therefore, it is particularly important to ensure that these systems are in line with the public interest and are properly regulated.

### Research Methods

To answer the above questions, the author conducted an online survey of German citizens and collected 983 valid samples in total. The survey designed four different RBI application scenarios (combining the time dimension and the purpose of use), and measured the respondents' support for RBI technology regulation, discrimination perception, trust in AI and technology, etc. through the Likert scale.

### Main Research Questions

1. **The influence of the time dimension on regulatory requirements**:
- RQ1: Will the time context of data analysis (post - hoc analysis vs. real - time analysis) affect the public's support for stricter regulatory intervention?

2. **The influence of the purpose of use on regulatory requirements**:
- RQ2: Will the purpose of using RBI (chasing criminals vs. ensuring the safety of public activities) affect the public's support for stricter regulatory intervention?

3. **The mediating role of discrimination perception**:
- RQ3: How does discrimination perception play a mediating role between the time context and support for stricter regulation?

4. **The influence of trust**:
- RQ4a: Will trust in AI affect the public's support for stricter regulatory intervention?
- RQ4b: Will trust in law - enforcement agencies affect the public's support for stricter regulatory intervention?

5. **The mediating role of discrimination perception (related to trust)**:
- RQ5a: How does discrimination perception play a mediating role between trust in AI and support for stricter regulation?
- RQ5b: How does discrimination perception play a mediating role between trust in law - enforcement agencies and support for stricter regulation?

6. **The influence of other situational factors**:
- RQ6: Will other situational factors affect the public's support for stricter regulatory intervention?
- RQ7: How does discrimination perception play a mediating role between other situational factors and support for stricter regulation?

### Conclusions

Through the structural equation model analysis of the data, the research found that:

- German citizens have no significant differences in the regulatory requirements for RBI technology in different application scenarios.
- Discrimination perception significantly increases the public's demand for stricter regulation.
- Trust in AI and law - enforcement agencies has the opposite effect on regulatory requirements: the higher the trust, the lower the support for banning RBI systems.

These results provide important empirical evidence for understanding the public's attitude towards AI technology regulation and provide references for policy - makers to ensure that the application of AI technology is in line with the public interest and is properly supervised.