Audit and Assurance of AI Algorithms: A framework to ensure ethical algorithmic practices in Artificial Intelligence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2107.14046v1
• Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 15:16:40 GMT
• Title: Audit and Assurance of AI Algorithms: A framework to ensure ethical algorithmic practices in Artificial Intelligence
• Authors: Ramya Akula and Ivan Garibay
• Abstract summary: U.S. lacks strict legislative prohibitions or specified protocols for measuring damages. From autonomous vehicles and banking to medical care, housing, and legal decisions, there will soon be enormous amounts of algorithms. Governments, businesses, and society would have an algorithm audit, which would have systematic verification that algorithms are lawful, ethical, and secure.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Algorithms are becoming more widely used in business, and businesses are becoming increasingly concerned that their algorithms will cause significant reputational or financial damage. We should emphasize that any of these damages stem from situations in which the United States lacks strict legislative prohibitions or specified protocols for measuring damages. As a result, governments are enacting legislation and enforcing prohibitions, regulators are fining businesses, and the judiciary is debating whether or not to make artificially intelligent computer models as the decision-makers in the eyes of the law. From autonomous vehicles and banking to medical care, housing, and legal decisions, there will soon be enormous amounts of algorithms that make decisions with limited human interference. Governments, businesses, and society would have an algorithm audit, which would have systematic verification that algorithms are lawful, ethical, and secure, similar to financial audits. A modern market, auditing, and assurance of algorithms developed to professionalize and industrialize AI, machine learning, and related algorithms. Stakeholders of this emerging field include policymakers and regulators, along with industry experts and entrepreneurs. In addition, we foresee audit thresholds and frameworks providing valuable information to all who are concerned with governance and standardization. This paper aims to review the critical areas required for auditing and assurance and spark discussion in this novel field of study and practice.

Related papers

• 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)
• Public vs Private Bodies: Who Should Run Advanced AI Evaluations and Audits? A Three-Step Logic Based on Case Studies of High-Risk Industries [0.5573180584719433]
  This paper draws from nine such regimes to inform who should audit which parts of advanced AI. The effective responsibility distribution between public and private auditors depends heavily on specific industry and audit conditions. Public bodies' capacity should scale with the industry's risk level, size and market concentration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T14:25:08Z)
• Open Problems in Technical AI Governance [93.89102632003996]
  Technical AI governance refers to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI. This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T21:13:56Z)
• Law and the Emerging Political Economy of Algorithmic Audits [1.3654846342364302]
  Digital Services Act (DSA) and Online Safety Act (OSA) have established the framework within which technology corporations and (traditional) auditors will develop the practice' of algorithmic auditing. This paper systematically reviews the auditing provisions in the DSA and the OSA in light of observations from the emerging industry of algorithmic auditing. We warn that ambitious research ideas and technical projects of/for algorithmic auditing may end up crashed by the standardising grip of traditional auditors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-03T19:45:30Z)
• Computing Power and the Governance of Artificial Intelligence [51.967584623262674]
  Governments and companies have started to leverage compute as a means to govern AI. compute-based policies and technologies have the potential to assist in these areas, but there is significant variation in their readiness for implementation. naive or poorly scoped approaches to compute governance carry significant risks in areas like privacy, economic impacts, and centralization of power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T21:10:21Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Regulation and NLP (RegNLP): Taming Large Language Models [51.41095330188972]
  We argue how NLP research can benefit from proximity to regulatory studies and adjacent fields. We advocate for the development of a new multidisciplinary research space on regulation and NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T09:22:40Z)
• Who Audits the Auditors? Recommendations from a field scan of the algorithmic auditing ecosystem [0.971392598996499]
  We provide the first comprehensive field scan of the AI audit ecosystem. We identify emerging best practices as well as methods and tools that are becoming commonplace. We outline policy recommendations to improve the quality and impact of these audits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-04T01:40:03Z)
• The Flaws of Policies Requiring Human Oversight of Government Algorithms [2.741266294612776]
  I propose a shift from human oversight to institutional oversight as the central mechanism for regulating government algorithms. First, agencies must justify that it is appropriate to incorporate an algorithm into decision-making. Second, these justifications must receive democratic public review and approval before the agency can adopt the algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-10T18:58:45Z)
• Imposing Regulation on Advanced Algorithms [0.0]
  The book examines universally applicable patterns in administrative decisions and judicial rulings. It investigates the role and significance of national and indeed supranational regulatory bodies for advanced algorithms. It considers ENISA, an EU agency that focuses on network and information security, as an interesting candidate for a European regulator of advanced algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-16T20:26:54Z)
• Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims [59.64274607533249]
  AI developers need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable. This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems. We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose--spanning institutions, software, and hardware--and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-15T17:15:35Z)

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.