Hard Choices in Artificial Intelligence
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.11022v1
- Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 09:49:34 GMT
- Title: Hard Choices in Artificial Intelligence
- Authors: Roel Dobbe, Thomas Krendl Gilbert, Yonatan Mintz
- Abstract summary: We show how this vagueness cannot be resolved through mathematical formalism alone.
We show how this vagueness cannot be resolved through mathematical formalism alone.
- Score: 0.8594140167290096
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: As AI systems are integrated into high stakes social domains, researchers now
examine how to design and operate them in a safe and ethical manner. However,
the criteria for identifying and diagnosing safety risks in complex social
contexts remain unclear and contested. In this paper, we examine the vagueness
in debates about the safety and ethical behavior of AI systems. We show how
this vagueness cannot be resolved through mathematical formalism alone, instead
requiring deliberation about the politics of development as well as the context
of deployment. Drawing from a new sociotechnical lexicon, we redefine vagueness
in terms of distinct design challenges at key stages in AI system development.
The resulting framework of Hard Choices in Artificial Intelligence (HCAI)
empowers developers by 1) identifying points of overlap between design
decisions and major sociotechnical challenges; 2) motivating the creation of
stakeholder feedback channels so that safety issues can be exhaustively
addressed. As such, HCAI contributes to a timely debate about the status of AI
development in democratic societies, arguing that deliberation should be the
goal of AI Safety, not just the procedure by which it is ensured.
Related papers
- Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systems [88.80306881112313]
We will introduce and define a family of approaches to AI safety, which we will refer to as guaranteed safe (GS) AI.
The core feature of these approaches is that they aim to produce AI systems which are equipped with high-assurance quantitative safety guarantees.
We outline a number of approaches for creating each of these three core components, describe the main technical challenges, and suggest a number of potential solutions to them.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-10T17:38:32Z) - Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
Particip-AI is a framework to gather current and future AI use cases and their harms and benefits from non-expert public.
We gather responses from 295 demographically diverse participants.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z) - 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) - Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress [171.05448842016125]
We describe risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems.
There is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them.
Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-26T17:59:06Z) - Inherent Limitations of AI Fairness [16.588468396705366]
The study of AI fairness has rapidly developed into a rich field of research with links to computer science, social science, law, and philosophy.
Many technical solutions for measuring and achieving AI fairness have been proposed, yet their approach has been criticized in recent years for being misleading, unrealistic and harmful.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-13T11:23:24Z) - 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) - Relational Artificial Intelligence [5.5586788751870175]
Even though AI is traditionally associated with rational decision making, understanding and shaping the societal impact of AI in all its facets requires a relational perspective.
A rational approach to AI, where computational algorithms drive decision making independent of human intervention, has shown to result in bias and exclusion.
A relational approach, that focus on the relational nature of things, is needed to deal with the ethical, legal, societal, cultural, and environmental implications of AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-02-04T15:29:57Z) - The social dilemma in AI development and why we have to solve it [2.707154152696381]
We argue that AI developers face a social dilemma in AI development ethics, preventing the widespread adaptation of ethical best practices.
We argue that AI development must be professionalised to overcome the social dilemma, and discuss how medicine can be used as a template in this process.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-07-27T17:43:48Z) - Building Bridges: Generative Artworks to Explore AI Ethics [56.058588908294446]
In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on understanding and mitigating adverse impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society.
A significant challenge in the design of ethical AI systems is that there are multiple stakeholders in the AI pipeline, each with their own set of constraints and interests.
This position paper outlines some potential ways in which generative artworks can play this role by serving as accessible and powerful educational tools.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-25T22:31:55Z) - 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) - Socially Responsible AI Algorithms: Issues, Purposes, and Challenges [31.382000425295885]
Technologists and AI researchers have a responsibility to develop trustworthy AI systems.
To build long-lasting trust between AI and human beings, we argue that the key is to think beyond algorithmic fairness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-01-01T17:34:42Z)
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.