Strengthening the EU AI Act: Defining Key Terms on AI Manipulation
It tackles the problem of vague regulatory language for policymakers and legal experts, offering incremental improvements to an existing framework.
This paper addresses the lack of precise definitions for key concepts like 'manipulative' and 'deceptive' in the EU AI Act, providing technical recommendations to improve its conceptual clarity and enforceability for regulating harmful AI manipulation.
The European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act aims to regulate manipulative and harmful uses of AI, but lacks precise definitions for key concepts. This paper provides technical recommendations to improve the Act's conceptual clarity and enforceability. We review psychological models to define "personality traits," arguing the Act should protect full "psychometric profiles." We urge expanding "behavior" to include "preferences" since preferences causally influence and are influenced by behavior. Clear definitions are provided for "subliminal," "manipulative," and "deceptive" techniques, considering incentives, intent, and covertness. We distinguish "exploiting individuals" from "exploiting groups," emphasising different policy needs. An "informed decision" is defined by four facets: comprehension, accurate information, no manipulation, and understanding AI's influence. We caution the Act's therapeutic use exemption given the lack of regulation of digital therapeutics by the EMA. Overall, the recommendations strengthen definitions of vague concepts in the EU AI Act, enhancing precise applicability to regulate harmful AI manipulation.