In this short paper we focus on human in the loop for rule-based software used for law enforcement. For example, one can think of software that computes fines like tachograph software, software that prepares evidence like DNA sequencing software or social profiling software to patrol in high-risk zones, among others. An important difference between a legal human agent and a software application lies in possible dialogues. A human agent can be interrogated to motivate her decisions. Often such dialogues with software are at the best extremely hard but mostly impossible. We observe that the absence of a dialogue can sincerely violate civil rights and legal principles like, for example, Transparency or Contestability. Thus, possible dialogues with legal algorithms are at the least highly desirable. Futuristic as this may sound, we observe that in various realms of formal methods, such dialogues are easily obtainable. However, this triggers the usual tension between the expressibility of the dialogue language and the feasibility of the corresponding computations.

翻译：在本篇短文中，我们聚焦于执法领域基于规则的软件中的人机协同问题。例如，可考虑计算罚款的行驶记录仪软件、制备证据的DNA测序软件，或用于高风险区域巡逻的社会画像软件等。法律代理人（人类主体）与软件应用之间的重要区别在于对话的可能性。人类代理人可通过质询对其决策进行论证。然而，与软件的此类对话往往极其困难，甚至大多不可能实现。我们观察到，对话的缺失可能严重侵犯公民权利和法律原则，例如透明度原则和可争议性原则。因此，与法律算法进行可能的对话至少是高度可取的。尽管这听起来颇具未来感，但我们注意到，在形式化方法的多个领域中，这类对话容易实现。然而，这又引发了对话语言表达力与相应计算可行性之间常见的张力。