Trials for AI lie detection at border patrol checkpoints are underway in the EU.
The program, called iBorderCtrl, started on November 1st and will run for six months at four border crossing points in Hungary, Latvia and Greece with countries outside the European Union
The EU-funded scheme aims to facilitate faster border crossings for travelers while weeding out potential criminals or illegal crossings but has been blasted by a civil liberties groups for being too Orwellian. They worry that this might lead to more widespread surveillance.
RT reports: Developed with €5 million in EU funding from partners across Europe, the pilot project will be operated by border agents in each of the trial countries and led by the Hungarian National Police.
Those using the system will first have to upload certain documents like passports, along with an online application form, before being assessed by the virtual, retina-scanning border agent.
The traveler will simply stare into a camera and answer the questions one would expect a diligent human border agent to ask, according to New Scientist.
“What’s in your suitcase?” and “If you open the suitcase and show me what is inside, will it confirm that your answers were true?”
But unlike a human border guard, the AI system is analyzing minute micro-gestures in the traveler’s facial expression, searching for any signs that they might be telling a lie.
If satisfied with the crosser’s honest intentions, the iBorderCtrl will reward them with a QR code that allows them safe passage into the EU.
Unsatisfied however, and travelers will have to go through additional biometric screening such as having fingerprints taken, facial matching, or palm vein reading. A final assessment is then made by a human agent.
Like all AI technologies in their infancy, the system is still highly experimental and with a current success rate of 76 percent, it won’t be actually preventing anyone from crossing the border during its six month trial. But developers of the system are “quite confident” that accuracy can be boosted to 85 percent with the fresh data.
However, greater concern comes from civil liberties groups who have previously warned about the gross inaccuracies found in systems based on machine-learning, especially ones that use facial recognition software.
In July, the head of London’s Metropolitan Police stood by trials of automated facial recognition (AFR) technology in parts of the city, despite reports that the AFR system had a 98 percent false positive rate, resulting in only two accurate matches.
The system had been labelled an “Orwellian surveillance tool,” by civil liberties group, Big Brother Watch.
Latest posts by Niamh Harris (see all)
- Whoopi Goldberg: How Dare Supreme Court Question ‘What A Fetus Wants’ - December 7, 2021
- Pet Owners Face £500 Fine If They Fail To Microchip Their Cats Under New UK Rules - December 7, 2021
- FDA Release First Batch Of Pfizer Vaccine Documents After Being Sued for Information - December 7, 2021