AI System Detects “Deception” in Courtroom Videos

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
Machine learning-based systems for identifying “deception” could be entering courtrooms someday: this one, which uses computer vision to identify and classify facial micro-expressions and audio frequency analysis to pick out revealing patterns in voices, was found to be almost 90 percent accurate, handily beating out humans assigned to the same task of detecting lies.

The subjectivity of a courtroom is both a bug and a feature. It allows for things like empathy, but it also (frequently) allows for very wrong determinations of guilt. That’s unsettling, but so is the idea of AI courtroom lie detectors and what sort of impact that may have on judges and juries.
 

deton8

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
445
An accurate camera based lie detector would unmake the world.
I wonder. Would everyone act differently knowing they were constantly being lied to? After all most lies are probably innocuous, to fluff up the ego or avoid embarrassment or hurt feelings. Not whether or not you colluded with Russia.

Maybe everyone would retreat even further online? Or like mass surveillance, would people just get used to it and behave as though the technology doesn't exist?
 

haste.

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Messages
1,651
I wonder. Would everyone act differently knowing they were constantly being lied to? After all most lies are probably innocuous, to fluff up the ego or avoid embarrassment or hurt feelings. Not whether or not you colluded with Russia.

Maybe everyone would retreat even further online? Or like mass surveillance, would people just get used to it and behave as though the technology doesn't exist?
Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,964
I believe I saw this TV show, it was called "Lie To Me" and stared Tim Roth. Actually liked the show, but they cancelled it after 2 or 3 seasons and replaced it with... fuck if I know another "hey lets pretend America is voting for their favorite entertainer but really the producers are deciding who wins" TV show.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,964
Oh, and yeah any sort of lie detection would make courtroom lawyers obsolete.

"Did you kill the person" "No?" he's innocent let him go
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Oh, and yeah any sort of lie detection would make courtroom lawyers obsolete.

"Did you kill the person" "No?" he's innocent let him go

Get it accurate enough and people might back replacing a jury of your peers with Judge Lugnut.

I'm an old man and have some dusty ideas about things, but I've sat on a Jury before and I don't have much faith in my peers as I witnessed first hand how that can go.
 

dj_spanmaster

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 1, 2004
Messages
413
I believe I saw this TV show, it was called "Lie To Me" and stared Tim Roth. Actually liked the show, but they cancelled it after 2 or 3 seasons and replaced it with... fuck if I know another "hey lets pretend America is voting for their favorite entertainer but really the producers are deciding who wins" TV show.

That was a GREAT show. I'm happy it's still remembered. The writing was brilliant, and Tim Roth's charisma was downright infectious
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
I wonder. Would everyone act differently knowing they were constantly being lied to? After all most lies are probably innocuous, to fluff up the ego or avoid embarrassment or hurt feelings. Not whether or not you colluded with Russia.

Maybe everyone would retreat even further online? Or like mass surveillance, would people just get used to it and behave as though the technology doesn't exist?

I like the way you think, the human element.

Yes, what if this tech brought new life to Google Glass 2.5 and knowing who is being deceptive drives sales through the roof, everyone wants it because no body wants to be left behind not knowing who is deceiving them.

Then imagine how you would feel if you learned that everyone was being deceptive for whatever reasons and the only thing it ever does for us is engender bone deep myopic insecurity and a most pessimistic attitude possible in everyone. It's a relief to just stay home and not have to face all the lying deceitful bastards in this world every moment of every day.

Once people saw the way things are, they just throw the glasses away cause they already know everyone is always lying so why bother.
 

nutzo

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 15, 2004
Messages
7,380
Going to watch C.O.P.S. - The Case of the Lying Lie Detector.

If 90% accurate, the last 10% is still a wide margin of inaccuracy. Not sure if I would trust AI.

90% is already more accurate than the court system.
 

TwistedAegis

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
8,958
Don't know about this; it says it detects "deception", not that it can identify what the truth is.

If I'm on the stand and I didn't kill someone, but I know who did and it makes me nervous, or sad, or whatever, could that emotional change in my delivery of my answer to the question, "Did you kill Kyle"? It would be a deception, but if that was used to convict me of murder it would still be a wrongful conviction.
 

SomeoneElse

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Messages
1,940
Not sure how i like that, people do not behave the same way in the same situation.....90% accurate on what types of questions?
 

BB Gun

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Messages
1,545
wait...

it uses computer vision to identify and classify facial micro-expressions and audio frequency analysis to pick out revealing patterns in voices. The resulting automatic deception classifier was found to be almost 90 percent accurate, handily beating out humans assigned to the same task. This was based on evaluations of 104 mock courtroom videos featuring actors instructed to be either deceptive or truthful.

Accuracy claims are completely bogus - actors are ALWAYS lying.... They do it for a living. I think they got the numbers reversed... ;)

BB
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Don't know about this; it says it detects "deception", not that it can identify what the truth is.

If I'm on the stand and I didn't kill someone, but I know who did and it makes me nervous, or sad, or whatever, could that emotional change in my delivery of my answer to the question, "Did you kill Kyle"? It would be a deception, but if that was used to convict me of murder it would still be a wrongful conviction.

Well, while it's only working at 90%, maybe we'll just use it for misdemeanors until they can give us 99.5%. What do you say? :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this

Monkey God

Mangina Full of Sand
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
6,723
This will only work on average people not used to lying all the time. Used car salesmen, lawyers, politicians, etc lie so much its just their normal modus operandi.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this

Revdarian

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
2,616
Any study based on ACTORS is worthless entirely.

This needs plenty of actual double blind type of tests prior to be deemed accurate, and waaaaaaaaaaaay more prior to being considered as possible for admission in any court, there is a reason why polygraphs aren't accepted (their actual accuracy rate irl is way worse than advertised in any tv show and lots of things can throw off the measurements of any instrument like this...)

We will see a new super battery adopted prior to this being used in any real sense imho.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this

Nytegard

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Messages
3,491
Any study based on ACTORS is worthless entirely.

This needs plenty of actual double blind type of tests prior to be deemed accurate, and waaaaaaaaaaaay more prior to being considered as possible for admission in any court, there is a reason why polygraphs aren't accepted (their actual accuracy rate irl is way worse than advertised in any tv show and lots of things can throw off the measurements of any instrument like this...)

We will see a new super battery adopted prior to this being used in any real sense imho.

Well, they would try it on political debates, but the AI would probably crash from exceeding acceptable bounds.

I wonder. Would everyone act differently knowing they were constantly being lied to? After all most lies are probably innocuous, to fluff up the ego or avoid embarrassment or hurt feelings. Not whether or not you colluded with Russia.

Maybe everyone would retreat even further online? Or like mass surveillance, would people just get used to it and behave as though the technology doesn't exist?

The problem is most people lie way too often. According to a study in 2002 from UMass Amherst:

https://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/ar...r-finds-most-people-lie-everyday-conversation

60% of people can't hold a conversation for 10 minutes without telling a lie. I'm sure a trial where actual lives are on the line would be even worse. A problem is, we've accepted lying from certain people to be considered normal. And in certain situations, lies can be helpful.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
If they sic it on all participants in the case, including the prosecutor, I might be for testing it in misdemeanor offenses.

I think many of us suspect that in real life, it would be going off on everyone all the time and therefor mostly useless. The generation that first adopts these devices for daily use will become the most jaded and cynical generation to ever walk the earth.

Sure, I'd want credit for creating that development :sick:
 

TwistedAegis

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
8,958
I think many of us suspect that in real life, it would be going off on everyone all the time and therefor mostly useless. The generation that first adopts these devices for daily use will become the most jaded and cynical generation to ever walk the earth.

Sure, I'd want credit for creating that development :sick:

I agree, but I'm also pretty suspicious of any headline of "AI/machine learning does X with 90%+ accuracy"...usually pretty far off from the real-world case.
 

J3RK

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
9,862
I agree, but I'm also pretty suspicious of any headline of "AI/machine learning does X with 90%+ accuracy"...usually pretty far off from the real-world case.

*** 90% accuracy in laboratory testing with skewed test cases. :D
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this

Azphira

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
1,854
People are nervous when they lie. People are nervous when they are innocent and may be sent to prison. Stop trying to solve crimes like Google tries to solve copyright violations.

But hey, only a few innocents destroyed to get vengeance on those criminals, eh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
14,964
That was a GREAT show. I'm happy it's still remembered. The writing was brilliant, and Tim Roth's charisma was downright infectious
I think the biggest problem with the show is they simply ran out of ideas, I mean shows like CSI lasted forever because there were all sorts of ways someone could be murdered, and found out. Lying... well yeah, "he looked up and to the right" gets old after a few seasons.
 

mord

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Messages
377
i would love to have this kind of tech during job interviews. 90% chance of hiring the right person? shut up and take my money.

My first reaction was heck yeah! Then I wondered how much would we change our hiring questions, and what would they be?

A few of my worst hires were honestly qualified, experianced, and thought they would excel at the job technically and socially.

My two best hires by far were short on experiance and didn't meet our target education level either. It was something about their personality in an extended interview that convinced me to hire them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this

Trepidati0n

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 26, 2004
Messages
9,205
*** 90% accuracy in laboratory testing with skewed test cases. :D

I 100% agree with this. The key to this system is to start putting it with real trials and real data and comparing them side by side. The advantage of deep learning systems is they can "learn". The one thing people are getting smart on with these systems is always running multiple of them in parallel and soft disturbances to ensure they don't find local minimums "to often".
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this

Revdarian

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 16, 2010
Messages
2,616
i would love to have this kind of tech during job interviews. 90% chance of hiring the right person? shut up and take my money.

It has 90% chance to detect what an actor thinks denotes deception, which isn't the same thing as actually being able to detect deception.

Tests with actors are worthless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this
Top