The aim of this article is to inquire whether contract law can operate in a state of affairs in which artificial general intelligence (AGI) exists and has the cog-nitive abilities to interact with humans to exchange promises or otherwise en-gage in the sorts of exchanges typically governed by contract law. AGI is a long way off but its emergence may be sudden and come in the lifetimes of some people alive today. How might contract law adapt to a situation in which at least one of the contract parties could, from the standpoint of capacity to engage in promising and exchange, be an AGI? This is not a situation in which AI operates as an agent of a human or a firm, a frequent occurrence right now. Rather, the question is whether an AGI could constitute a principal – a contract party on its own. Contract law is a good place to start a discussion about adapt-ing the law for an AGI future because it already incorporates a version of what is known as weak AI in its objective standard for contract formation and inter-pretation. Contract law in some limited sense takes on issues of relevance from philosophy of mind. AGI holds the potential to transform a solution to an epis-temological problem of how to prove a contract exists into solution to an onto-logical problem about the capacity to contract. An objection might be that con-tract law presupposes the existence of a person the law recognizes as pos-sessing the capacity to contract. Contract law itself may not be able to answer the prior question of legally recognized personhood. The answer will be to fo-cus on how AGI cognitive architecture could be designed for compatibility for human interaction. This article focuses on that question as well.

中文翻译：

---

人工智能与合约

本文的目的是探究合同法是否可以在存在通用人工智能 (AGI) 并具有与人类互动以交换承诺或以其他方式参与各种活动的认知能力的情况下运作。交易所通常受合同法管辖。AGI还有很长的路要走，但它的出现可能是突然的，并且在今天活着的一些人的一生中出现。合同法如何适应这样一种情况，即从参与承诺和交换的能力的角度来看，至少有一个合同方可以成为 AGI？这不是人工智能作为人类或公司的代理人运作的情况，现在经常发生。相反，问题在于 AGI 是否可以单独构成委托人——合同方。合同法是开始讨论为 AGI 未来调整法律的好地方，因为它已经在其合同形成和解释的客观标准中包含了所谓的弱人工智能版本。合同法在某种有限的意义上处理与心灵哲学相关的问题。AGI 具有将如何证明合同存在的认识论问题的解决方案转化为关于合同能力的本体逻辑问题的解决方案的潜力。一种反对意见可能是，合同法以法律承认的人的存在为先决条件，该人具有订立合同的能力。合同法本身可能无法回答法律承认的人格这一先前的问题。答案将是关注如何设计 AGI 认知架构以实现人类交互的兼容性。这篇文章也关注这个问题。