AI Hazard Management: A framework for the systematic management of root causes for AI risks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.16727v2
• Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 12:55:59 GMT
• Title: AI Hazard Management: A framework for the systematic management of root causes for AI risks
• Authors: Ronald Schnitzer, Andreas Hapfelmeier, Sven Gaube, Sonja Zillner
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces the AI Hazard Management (AIHM) framework. It provides a structured process to systematically identify, assess, and treat AI hazards. It builds upon an AI hazard list from a comprehensive state-of-the-art analysis.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advancements in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) establish the basis to address challenging tasks. However, with the integration of AI, new risks arise. Therefore, to benefit from its advantages, it is essential to adequately handle the risks associated with AI. Existing risk management processes in related fields, such as software systems, need to sufficiently consider the specifics of AI. A key challenge is to systematically and transparently identify and address AI risks' root causes - also called AI hazards. This paper introduces the AI Hazard Management (AIHM) framework, which provides a structured process to systematically identify, assess, and treat AI hazards. The proposed process is conducted in parallel with the development to ensure that any AI hazard is captured at the earliest possible stage of the AI system's life cycle. In addition, to ensure the AI system's auditability, the proposed framework systematically documents evidence that the potential impact of identified AI hazards could be reduced to a tolerable level. The framework builds upon an AI hazard list from a comprehensive state-of-the-art analysis. Also, we provide a taxonomy that supports the optimal treatment of the identified AI hazards. Additionally, we illustrate how the AIHM framework can increase the overall quality of a power grid AI use case by systematically reducing the impact of identified hazards to an acceptable level.

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)
• Engineering Trustworthy AI: A Developer Guide for Empirical Risk Minimization [53.80919781981027]
  Key requirements for trustworthy AI can be translated into design choices for the components of empirical risk minimization. We hope to provide actionable guidance for building AI systems that meet emerging standards for trustworthiness of AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T07:53:32Z)
• EAIRiskBench: Towards Evaluating Physical Risk Awareness for Task Planning of Foundation Model-based Embodied AI Agents [47.69642609574771]
  Embodied artificial intelligence (EAI) integrates advanced AI models into physical entities for real-world interaction. Foundation models as the "brain" of EAI agents for high-level task planning have shown promising results. However, the deployment of these agents in physical environments presents significant safety challenges. This study introduces EAIRiskBench, a novel framework for automated physical risk assessment in EAI scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T13:19:37Z)
• Responsible AI Question Bank: A Comprehensive Tool for AI Risk Assessment [17.026921603767722]
  The study introduces our Responsible AI (RAI) Question Bank, a comprehensive framework and tool designed to support diverse AI initiatives. By integrating AI ethics principles such as fairness, transparency, and accountability into a structured question format, the RAI Question Bank aids in identifying potential risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T22:40:20Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• An Overview of Catastrophic AI Risks [38.84933208563934]
  This paper provides an overview of the main sources of catastrophic AI risks, which we organize into four categories. Malicious use, in which individuals or groups intentionally use AIs to cause harm; AI race, in which competitive environments compel actors to deploy unsafe AIs or cede control to AIs. organizational risks, highlighting how human factors and complex systems can increase the chances of catastrophic accidents. rogue AIs, describing the inherent difficulty in controlling agents far more intelligent than humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T03:35:06Z)
• Responsible Design Patterns for Machine Learning Pipelines [10.184056098238765]
  AI ethics involves applying ethical principles to the entire life cycle of AI systems. This is essential to mitigate potential risks and harms associated with AI, such as biases. To achieve this goal, responsible design patterns (RDPs) are critical for Machine Learning (ML) pipelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T15:47:12Z)
• QB4AIRA: A Question Bank for AI Risk Assessment [19.783485414942284]
  QB4AIRA comprises 293 prioritized questions covering a wide range of AI risk areas. It serves as a valuable resource for stakeholders in assessing and managing AI risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-16T09:18:44Z)
• AI Maintenance: A Robustness Perspective [91.28724422822003]
  We introduce highlighted robustness challenges in the AI lifecycle and motivate AI maintenance by making analogies to car maintenance. We propose an AI model inspection framework to detect and mitigate robustness risks. Our proposal for AI maintenance facilitates robustness assessment, status tracking, risk scanning, model hardening, and regulation throughout the AI lifecycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-08T15:02:38Z)
• A Brief Overview of AI Governance for Responsible Machine Learning Systems [3.222802562733787]
  This position paper seeks to present a brief introduction to AI governance, which is a framework designed to oversee the responsible use of AI. Due to the probabilistic nature of AI, the risks associated with it are far greater than traditional technologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-21T23:48:51Z)

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.