A multidomain relational framework to guide institutional AI research and adoption

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.10106v2
• Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 11:53:46 GMT
• Title: A multidomain relational framework to guide institutional AI research and adoption
• Authors: Vincent J. Straub, Deborah Morgan, Youmna Hashem, John Francis, Saba Esnaashari, Jonathan Bright
• Abstract summary: We argue that research efforts aimed at understanding the implications of adopting AI tend to prioritize only a handful of ideas. We propose a simple policy and research design tool in the form of a conceptual framework to organize terms across fields.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Calls for new metrics, technical standards and governance mechanisms to guide the adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in institutions and public administration are now commonplace. Yet, most research and policy efforts aimed at understanding the implications of adopting AI tend to prioritize only a handful of ideas; they do not fully connect all the different perspectives and topics that are potentially relevant. In this position paper, we contend that this omission stems, in part, from what we call the relational problem in socio-technical discourse: fundamental ontological issues have not yet been settled--including semantic ambiguity, a lack of clear relations between concepts and differing standard terminologies. This contributes to the persistence of disparate modes of reasoning to assess institutional AI systems, and the prevalence of conceptual isolation in the fields that study them including ML, human factors, social science and policy. After developing this critique, we offer a way forward by proposing a simple policy and research design tool in the form of a conceptual framework to organize terms across fields--consisting of three horizontal domains for grouping relevant concepts and related methods: Operational, Epistemic, and Normative. We first situate this framework against the backdrop of recent socio-technical discourse at two premier academic venues, AIES and FAccT, before illustrating how developing suitable metrics, standards, and mechanisms can be aided by operationalizing relevant concepts in each of these domains. Finally, we outline outstanding questions for developing this relational approach to institutional AI research and adoption.

Related papers

• Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment: A Systematic Review for Clarifications, Framework, and Future Directions [101.67121669727354]
  Recent advancements in AI have highlighted the importance of guiding AI systems towards the intended goals, ethical principles, and values of individuals and groups, a concept broadly recognized as alignment. The lack of clarified definitions and scopes of human-AI alignment poses a significant obstacle, hampering collaborative efforts across research domains to achieve this alignment. We introduce a systematic review of over 400 papers published between 2019 and January 2024, spanning multiple domains such as Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• Resolving Ethics Trade-offs in Implementing Responsible AI [18.894725256708128]
  We cover five approaches for addressing the tensions via trade-offs, ranging from rudimentary to complex. None of the approaches is likely to be appropriate for all organisations, systems, or applications. We propose a framework which consists of: (i) proactive identification of tensions, (ii) prioritisation and weighting of ethics aspects, (iii) justification and documentation of trade-off decisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-16T04:14:23Z)
• Report of the 1st Workshop on Generative AI and Law [78.62063815165968]
  This report presents the takeaways of the inaugural Workshop on Generative AI and Law (GenLaw) A cross-disciplinary group of practitioners and scholars from computer science and law convened to discuss the technical, doctrinal, and policy challenges presented by law for Generative AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-11T04:13:37Z)
• Towards a General Framework for Continual Learning with Pre-training [55.88910947643436]
  We present a general framework for continual learning of sequentially arrived tasks with the use of pre-training. We decompose its objective into three hierarchical components, including within-task prediction, task-identity inference, and task-adaptive prediction. We propose an innovative approach to explicitly optimize these components with parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) techniques and representation statistics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-21T02:03:38Z)
• The Participatory Turn in AI Design: Theoretical Foundations and the Current State of Practice [64.29355073494125]
  This article aims to ground what we dub the "participatory turn" in AI design by synthesizing existing theoretical literature on participation. We articulate empirical findings concerning the current state of participatory practice in AI design based on an analysis of recently published research and semi-structured interviews with 12 AI researchers and practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T05:30:42Z)
• Stronger Together: on the Articulation of Ethical Charters, Legal Tools, and Technical Documentation in ML [5.433040083728602]
  The need for accountability of the people behind AI systems can be addressed by leveraging processes in three fields of study: ethics, law, and computer science. We first contrast notions of compliance in the ethical, legal, and technical fields. We then focus on the role of values in articulating the synergies between the fields.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-09T15:35:31Z)
• Artificial intelligence in government: Concepts, standards, and a unified framework [0.0]
  Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) hold the promise of transforming government. It is critical that new AI systems behave in alignment with the normative expectations of society.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-31T10:57:20Z)
• Tackling problems, harvesting benefits -- A systematic review of the regulatory debate around AI [0.0]
  How to integrate an emerging and all-pervasive technology such as AI into the structures and operations of our society is a question of contemporary politics, science and public debate. This article analyzes the academic debate around the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) The analysis concentrates on societal risks and harms, questions of regulatory responsibility, and possible adequate policy frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-07T11:29:30Z)
• 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)
• Ethical Assurance: A practical approach to the responsible design, development, and deployment of data-driven technologies [0.0]
  Article offers contributions to the interdisciplinary project of responsible research and innovation in data science and AI. First, it provides a critical analysis of current efforts to establish practical mechanisms for algorithmic assessment. Second, it provides an accessible introduction to the methodology of argument-based assurance. Third, it establishes a novel version of argument-based assurance that we call 'ethical assurance'
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-11T11:21:49Z)
• 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.