Research on Legal Regulations of Information Automated Decision-making from the Perspective of Private Law


  • Ye Ju
  • Shaoqing Zhang
  • Meiling Lan



Information automated decision-making, Transparency, Discrimination, Legal regulations.


Information automated decision-making has been widely applied and developed in private field. Being in the trend of a mighty rise, it brings convenience to life, meanwhile its own nature attribute of the “black box” has triggered various legal challenges which are increasingly prominent, such as the issues of transparency, discrimination and interpretation power. The legal regulations of automatic information decision-making from the perspective of private law need to analyze the causes of legal challenges and the limitations of relevant legal regulations. Exploring the root causes of interest conflicts and putting forward suggestions on the right structure of data subjects and the definition of obligations of decision-making subjects, as well as being based on the status quo of private law of information automated decision-making in China, this paper proposes legal regulations from the perspectives of legislation, institutional framework, multiple governance mechanism and judicial accountability.


Download data is not yet available.


Zhang Linghan: Algorithm-based Accountability System Construction of Network Platform Supervision[J]. Oriental Law, 2021.

Yang Lixin: The Role of Civil Liability in Artificial Intelligence Development Risk Control[J]. Journal of Law,2019.

Zhang Linghan: Rise of Algorithmatic Power, Alienation and Legal Regulations, [J]. Research of Law and Business,2019.

Tang Linyao: Illusory Promise of “Breaking away from Algorithmic Automated Decision Rights”[J]. Oriental Law,2020.

Zhang Xin: From Algorithm Crisis to Algorithm Trust: Multiple Schemes and Localization Paths of Algorithm Governance[J]. Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law,2019.

Wang Qinghua: Multiple Dimensions of Algorithm Transparency and Algorithm Accountability[J]. Comparative Method Research,2020.

Sun Yixiao, Zheng Haoran: the Extraterritorial Experience of Algorithmic Governance and Its Approach in China[J]. Information Security Research, 2021.

Burrell J: How the Machine ‘Thinks’: Understanding Opacity in Machine Learning Algorithms[J]. Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2015.

Sonia K. Katyal: Private Accountability in the Age of Artificial Intelligence[J], UCLA Law Review,2019.

Lilian, Edwards, Michael, & Veale. Slave to the Algorithm? Why a 'Right to an Explanation' is Probably not the Remedy You are Looking for[J]. Duke Law & Technology Review, 2017.

Edwards L, Veale M. Enslaving the Algorithm: From a “Right to an Explanation” to a “Right to Better Decisions”?[J]. IEEE Security and Privacy Magazine, 2018.

Goodman B, Flaxman S. European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a “right to explanation”[J]. AI Magazine, 2016.

Zhang Endian, Algorithm Interpretation Right in the Era of Big Data: Background, Logic and Structure, 34 Law Forum 152-160 (2019).

Mireille Hildebrand, Privacy, Due Process and Computational Turning: The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Technology[M]. New York: Routledge 143-167 (2013).

Tan Jiusheng & Fan Xiaoyun, Causes, Risks and Governance of Algorithm “Black Box”, 23 Journal of Hunan University of Science and Technology 92-99 (2020).

Sun Jianli, Research on Legal Regulation of Algorithm Automation Decision Risk, Research on the Rule of Law 108-117 (2019).

Diakopoulos N, Algorithmic Accountability: Journalistic investigation of computational power structures, Digital Journalism 398-415 (2015).

Jia Zhangfan, Institutional Construction of Claim Right of Algorithmic Interpretation from the Perspective of Law and Economics, Journal of Heilongjiang Political and Legal Management Cadre College 74-78 (2018).

Tian Guanglan, Data Subject Rights in the Era of Big Data and its Pending Issues -- Taking the EU General Data Protection Regulations as the Analysis Object, 34 Journal of Renmin University of China 131-141 (2020).

Liang Zhiwen, On Algorithm Exclusivity: Path Selection to Get Rid of Algorithm Bias, Politics and Law 94-106 (2020).

B. Lepri, J. Staiano & D. Sangokoya, The Tyranny of Data? The Bright and Dark Sides of Data -- Driven Decision - Making for Social Good, Transparent Data Mining for Big and Small Data, (3) 24 Springer International Publishing (2017).

Cui Shujie & Zhang Hong, Infringement and Protection Path of Data Mining on Personal Information, 40 Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University 137-144 (2020).

Sandra Wachter, Brent Mitelstadt and Chris Rusel, Counterfactual Explanations Without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, Vol.31, No.2, 2018, pp.1-52.

Richard Warner and Robert H.Sloans, The Ethics of the Algorithm: Autonomous Systems and the Wrapper of Human Control, Cumberland Law Review, Vol.48, No.1, 2017, pp.37-66; Doa Abu-Elyounes, Contextual Fairness: A Legal and Policy Analysis of Algorithmic Fairness, Journal of Law, Technology & Policy, Vol.2020, No.1, 2020, pp.1-54.

Zhang Endian, Anti Algorithmic Discrimination: Theoretical Reflection and Institutional Construction, 34 Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology 60-71 (2020).

Cheng Ying, Data Protection and Algorithmic Regulation under Meta Regulation Mode -- Taking the EU General Data Protection Regulations as the Research Sample, 37 Legal Science 48-55 (2019).

Guo Zhe, Rethinking Algorithmic Power, 38 Law Review 33-41 (2020).

Sun Jianli, Research on Legal Regulation of Algorithm Automation Decision Risk, Research on the Rule of Law 108-117 (2019).







How to Cite

Research on Legal Regulations of Information Automated Decision-making from the Perspective of Private Law. (2022). Academic Journal of Science and Technology, 2(1), 49-55.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 264

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.