Assessing the impact of regulations and standards on innovation in the field of AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.04110v1
• Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 15:04:57 GMT
• Title: Assessing the impact of regulations and standards on innovation in the field of AI
• Authors: Alessio Tartaro, Adam Leon Smith, Patricia Shaw
• Abstract summary: This paper critically examines the idea that regulation stifles innovation in the field of AI. Current trends in AI regulation and the standards supporting its implementation are discussed. Arguments in support of the idea that regulation stifles innovation are analysed and criticised.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Regulations and standards in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) are necessary to minimise risks and maximise benefits, yet some argue that they stifle innovation. This paper critically examines the idea that regulation stifles innovation in the field of AI. Current trends in AI regulation, particularly the proposed European AI Act and the standards supporting its implementation, are discussed. Arguments in support of the idea that regulation stifles innovation are analysed and criticised, and an alternative point of view is offered, showing how regulation and standards can foster innovation in the field of AI.

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)
• The Artificial Intelligence Act: critical overview [0.0]
  This article provides a critical overview of the recently approved Artificial Intelligence Act. It starts by presenting the main structure, objectives, and approach of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. The text concludes that even if the overall framework can be deemed adequate and balanced, the approach is so complex that it risks defeating its own purpose.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-30T21:38:02Z)
• An FDA for AI? Pitfalls and Plausibility of Approval Regulation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence [0.0]
  We explore the applicability of approval regulation -- that is, regulation of a product that combines experimental minima with government licensure conditioned partially or fully upon that experimentation -- to the regulation of frontier AI. There are a number of reasons to believe that approval regulation, simplistically applied, would be inapposite for frontier AI risks. We conclude by highlighting the role of policy learning and experimentation in regulatory development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-01T17:54:57Z)
• The Necessity of AI Audit Standards Boards [0.0]
  We argue that creating auditing standards is not just insufficient, but actively harmful by proliferating unheeded and inconsistent standards. Instead, the paper proposes the establishment of an AI Audit Standards Board, responsible for developing and updating auditing methods and standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-11T15:08:24Z)
• 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)
• Both eyes open: Vigilant Incentives help Regulatory Markets improve AI Safety [69.59465535312815]
  Regulatory Markets for AI is a proposal designed with adaptability in mind. It involves governments setting outcome-based targets for AI companies to achieve. We warn that it is alarmingly easy to stumble on incentives which would prevent Regulatory Markets from achieving this goal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-06T14:42:05Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• A Pragmatic Approach to Regulating Artificial Intelligence: A Technology Regulator's Perspective [1.614803913005309]
  We present a pragmatic approach for providing a technology assurance regulatory framework. It is proposed that such regulation should not be mandated for all AI-based systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-15T16:49:29Z)
• Regulating Artificial Intelligence: Proposal for a Global Solution [6.037312672659089]
  We argue that AI-related challenges cannot be tackled effectively without sincere international coordination. We propose the establishment of an international AI governance framework organized around a new AI regulatory agency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-22T09:24:07Z)

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.