Advancing AI Audits for Enhanced AI Governance

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.00044v1
• Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 16:18:17 GMT
• Title: Advancing AI Audits for Enhanced AI Governance
• Authors: Arisa Ema, Ryo Sato, Tomoharu Hase, Masafumi Nakano, Shinji Kamimura, Hiromu Kitamura
• Abstract summary: This policy recommendation summarizes the issues related to the auditing of AI services and systems. It presents three recommendations for promoting AI auditing that contribute to sound AI governance.
• Score: 1.875782323187985
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) is integrated into various services and systems in society, many companies and organizations have proposed AI principles, policies, and made the related commitments. Conversely, some have proposed the need for independent audits, arguing that the voluntary principles adopted by the developers and providers of AI services and systems insufficiently address risk. This policy recommendation summarizes the issues related to the auditing of AI services and systems and presents three recommendations for promoting AI auditing that contribute to sound AI governance. Recommendation1.Development of institutional design for AI audits. Recommendation2.Training human resources for AI audits. Recommendation3. Updating AI audits in accordance with technological progress. In this policy recommendation, AI is assumed to be that which recognizes and predicts data with the last chapter outlining how generative AI should be audited.

Related papers

• Auditing of AI: Legal, Ethical and Technical Approaches [0.0]
  AI auditing is a rapidly growing field of research and practice. Different approaches to AI auditing have different affordances and constraints. The next step in the evolution of auditing as an AI governance mechanism should be the interlinking of these available approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-07T12:49:58Z)
• A Blueprint for Auditing Generative AI [0.9999629695552196]
  generative AI systems display emergent capabilities and are adaptable to a wide range of downstream tasks. Existing auditing procedures fail to address the governance challenges posed by generative AI systems. We propose a three-layered approach, whereby governance audits of technology providers that design and disseminate generative AI systems, model audits of generative AI systems after pre-training but prior to their release, and application audits of applications based on top of generative AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-07T11:56:54Z)
• Combining AI Control Systems and Human Decision Support via Robustness and Criticality [53.10194953873209]
  We extend a methodology for adversarial explanations (AE) to state-of-the-art reinforcement learning frameworks. We show that the learned AI control system demonstrates robustness against adversarial tampering. In a training / learning framework, this technology can improve both the AI's decisions and explanations through human interaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T15:38:57Z)
• Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
  General purpose AI seems to have lowered the barriers for the public to use AI and harness its power. We introduce PARTICIP-AI, a framework for laypeople to speculate and assess AI use cases and their impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z)
• Testing autonomous vehicles and AI: perspectives and challenges from cybersecurity, transparency, robustness and fairness [53.91018508439669]
  The study explores the complexities of integrating Artificial Intelligence into Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) It examines the challenges introduced by AI components and the impact on testing procedures. The paper identifies significant challenges and suggests future directions for research and development of AI in AV technology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T08:29:42Z)
• AI auditing: The Broken Bus on the Road to AI Accountability [1.9758196889515185]
  "AI audit" ecosystem is muddled and imprecise, making it difficult to work through various concepts and map out the stakeholders involved in the practice. First, we taxonomize current AI audit practices as completed by regulators, law firms, civil society, journalism, academia, consulting agencies. We find that only a subset of AI audit studies translate to desired accountability outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-25T19:00:29Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)
• Conformity Assessments and Post-market Monitoring: A Guide to the Role of Auditing in the Proposed European AI Regulation [0.0]
  We describe and discuss the two primary enforcement mechanisms proposed in the European Artificial Intelligence Act. We argue that AIA can be interpreted as a proposal to establish a Europe-wide ecosystem for conducting AI auditing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-09T11:59:47Z)
• 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)
• 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.