Can AI Be a Mashgiach?
by R. Gil Student
I. AI and Video Supervision
As artificial intelligence (AI) makes its way into the workforce, it is worth asking whether it can serve as a mashgiach, a kosher inspector. While in the future there may be AI robots that can visit restaurants and factories, we do not have to look ahead to consider this question. Already today, many factories and restaurants are equipped with video cameras that enable remote supervision. During Covid, the use of such surveillance became even more widespread.
One problem with video surveillance is that it requires someone to watch the camera feeds, which can become a significant challenge as kosher supervision cameras proliferate. AI may offer a solution to this problem. Can AI be trusted to inspect the camera feeds and certify that nothing improper occurs at the establishments under supervision?
AI technology paired with live video feeds has already become a valuable tool in general surveillance. It monitors activity, detects anomalies and provides real-time data on temperature, movement and workflow. In fact, it can also monitor other electronic information about food production, such as ingredient ordering and delivery schedules. AI can even reduce human error or alert to suspicious behavior. However, kosher inspection involves more than monitoring.
A mashgiach must be aware of the broader context: how ingredients are sourced, how utensils are maintained and how personnel follow halakhic restrictions. Nothing can replace an in-person inspection. A simple conversation with employees reveals a lot about the professionalism of the operation, unexpected changes that have happened or are about to happen, and general information about personnel and processes. Additionally, cameras can be manipulated and visual access may not capture essential details.
Be that as it may, there still is room for AI to serve as the video mashgiach that works alongside human inspectors. Is AI halakhically trusted for this work?
II. Mashgiach: Testimony or Trust?
Very often, a mashgiach is not permanently stationed at a factory or restaurant. He comes and goes periodically (yotzei ve-nikhnas), conducting spot checks. The halakhic mechanism that allows yotzei ve-nikhnas is the concept of mirsas, fear. Namely, the workers do not violate proper procedures because they fear being caught by the mashgiach on a spot check or on a video stream. This fear serves as a deterrent and ensures compliance.
When a mashgiach affirms a factory’s procedures, is he testifying to the kosher status of the food? If he has not witnessed the food’s production, it is not clear whether he can testify to that. Perhaps the concept of mirsas enables the mashgiach to testify even when he does not see the entire production. Or, alternatively, it eliminates the need for testimony altogether, allowing the mashgiach to simply report facts on the ground. Put differently, is the mashgiach testifying about the food or is he serving as an agent of the supervising rabbi who testifies about the food? As long as the mashgiach verifies the food production to the satisfaction of the supervising rabbi’s halakhic requirements, the supervising rabbi – whose name appears on the kosher certificate – can testify that the food is kosher. If so, AI can serve as a mashgiach.
On the other hand, if a mashgiach is considered a witness, then the laws of testimony for forbidden foods apply. Only an observant Jewish adult can serve in such a capacity. A gentile, a child or someone lacking halakhic competence is disqualified. AI, which lacks personhood and obligation in mitzvos, would certainly be excluded on these grounds.
III. Women and AI
The question of AI as a mashgiach can be informed by the halakhic discussion about whether women can serve in kosher supervision. Rav Moshe Feinstein (20th cen., US) argues that a woman may serve as a kosher supervisor (Igros Moshe, Yoreh De’ah 2:44). Rav Feinstein addresses two concerns: 1) is a woman’s testimony accepted in complex kosher matters? To this, he answers yes. 2) Can a woman serve in a communal position of authority? To this, Rav Feinstein answers no but suggests that she appoint a supervising rabbi to formally issue the kosher certificate while she serves as the kosher inspector.
Can this model work for AI also? It seems not, because Rav Feinstein still requires the woman inspector to testify to the supervising rabbi about the food’s kosher status. However, Rav Feinstein opens the door to a different framework. In the directly preceding responsum (op cit., 43), he writes that in many practical areas of kashrus, we rely not on formal testimony but on ne’emanus – the halakhic assumption of trustworthiness. When someone is known to be honest and trustworthy, halakhah allows reliance on their word even without the structure of testimony (Igros Moshe, Yoreh De’ah 2:43). If so, then maybe even AI can be relied upon even if the mashgiach testifies to the food’s kosher status. A well-trained AI, thoroughly tested and validated, may be even more trustworthy than a human because it has no personal interests or distractions that might compromise its judgment.
If so, it seems that when it comes to monitoring video feeds, AI can serve as a kosher inspector that provides important information for the consideration of the supervising rabbi. This is true assuming that the AI has been tested and verified as an accurate inspector of videos. This also assumes that a separate inspector makes site visits to review other pertinent information.
Potentially, AI is a powerful tool of kosher supervision. It can inspect important parts of the kosher food production process. However, currently it cannot replace the site visit and merely supplements the visit with the monitoring of electronic surveillance.