Montreal AI Ethics Institute's Response to Scotland's AI Strategy

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.06300v1
• Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 10:08:17 GMT
• Title: Montreal AI Ethics Institute's Response to Scotland's AI Strategy
• Authors: Abhishek Gupta (Montreal AI Ethics Institute and Microsoft)
• Abstract summary: In January and February 2020, the Scottish Government released two documents for review by the public regarding their artificial intelligence (AI) strategy. The Montreal AI Ethics Institute (MAIEI) reviewed these documents and published a response on 4 June 2020.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In January and February 2020, the Scottish Government released two documents for review by the public regarding their artificial intelligence (AI) strategy. The Montreal AI Ethics Institute (MAIEI) reviewed these documents and published a response on 4 June 2020. MAIEI's response examines several questions that touch on the proposed definition of AI; the people-centered nature of the strategy; considerations to ensure that everyone benefits from AI; the strategy's overarching vision; Scotland's AI ecosystem; the proposed strategic themes; and how to grow public confidence in AI by building responsible and ethical systems. In addition to examining the points above, MAIEI suggests that the strategy be extended to include considerations on biometric data and how that will be processed and used in the context of AI. It also highlights the importance of tackling head-on the inherently stochastic nature of deep learning systems and developing concrete guidelines to ensure that these systems are built responsibly and ethically, particularly as machine learning becomes more accessible. Finally, it concludes that any national AI strategy must clearly address the measurements of success in regards to the strategy's stated goals and vision to ensure that they are interpreted and applied consistently. To do this, there must be inclusion and transparency between those building the systems and those using them in their work.

Related papers

• Imagining and building wise machines: The centrality of AI metacognition [78.76893632793497]
  We argue that shortcomings stem from one overarching failure: AI systems lack wisdom. While AI research has focused on task-level strategies, metacognition is underdeveloped in AI systems. We propose that integrating metacognitive capabilities into AI systems is crucial for enhancing their robustness, explainability, cooperation, and safety.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T18:10:10Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Strategic AI Governance: Insights from Leading Nations [0.0]
  Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to revolutionize various sectors, yet its adoption is often hindered by concerns about data privacy, security, and the understanding of AI capabilities. This paper synthesizes AI governance approaches, strategic themes, and enablers and challenges for AI adoption by reviewing national AI strategies from leading nations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-16T06:00:42Z)
• Combining AI Control Systems and Human Decision Support via Robustness and Criticality [53.10194953873209]
  We extend a methodology for adversarial explanations (AE) to state-of-the-art reinforcement learning frameworks. We show that the learned AI control system demonstrates robustness against adversarial tampering. In a training / learning framework, this technology can improve both the AI's decisions and explanations through human interaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T15:38:57Z)
• Towards a Privacy and Security-Aware Framework for Ethical AI: Guiding the Development and Assessment of AI Systems [0.0]
  This study conducts a systematic literature review spanning the years 2020 to 2023. Through the synthesis of knowledge extracted from the SLR, this study presents a conceptual framework tailored for privacy- and security-aware AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-13T15:39:57Z)
• Responsible Artificial Intelligence: A Structured Literature Review [0.0]
  The EU has recently issued several publications emphasizing the necessity of trust in AI. This highlights the urgent need for international regulation. This paper introduces a comprehensive and, to our knowledge, the first unified definition of responsible AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-11T17:01:13Z)
• POLARIS: A framework to guide the development of Trustworthy AI systems [3.02243271391691]
  There is a significant gap between high-level AI ethics principles and low-level concrete practices for AI professionals. We develop a novel holistic framework for Trustworthy AI - designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice. Our goal is to empower AI professionals to confidently navigate the ethical dimensions of Trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-08T01:05:16Z)
• Trust, Accountability, and Autonomy in Knowledge Graph-based AI for Self-determination [1.4305544869388402]
  Knowledge Graphs (KGs) have emerged as fundamental platforms for powering intelligent decision-making. The integration of KGs with neuronal learning is currently a topic of active research. This paper conceptualises the foundational topics and research pillars to support KG-based AI for self-determination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T12:51:52Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.