Resolving Ethics Trade-offs in Implementing Responsible AI
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.08103v4
- Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 05:34:48 GMT
- Title: Resolving Ethics Trade-offs in Implementing Responsible AI
- Authors: Conrad Sanderson, Emma Schleiger, David Douglas, Petra Kuhnert, Qinghua Lu,
- Abstract summary: 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.
- Score: 18.894725256708128
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: While the operationalisation of high-level AI ethics principles into practical AI/ML systems has made progress, there is still a theory-practice gap in managing tensions between the underlying AI ethics aspects. We cover five approaches for addressing the tensions via trade-offs, ranging from rudimentary to complex. The approaches differ in the types of considered context, scope, methods for measuring contexts, and degree of justification. None of the approaches is likely to be appropriate for all organisations, systems, or applications. To address this, 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. The proposed framework aims to facilitate the implementation of well-rounded AI/ML systems that are appropriate for potential regulatory requirements.
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) - Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair
Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
"Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture.
This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias.
In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z) - Implementing Responsible AI: Tensions and Trade-Offs Between Ethics Aspects [21.133468554780404]
We focus on two-sided interactions, drawing on support spread across a diverse literature.
This catalogue can be helpful in raising awareness of the possible interactions between aspects of ethics principles.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-17T13:43:13Z) - A multidomain relational framework to guide institutional AI research
and adoption [0.0]
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.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-17T16:33:01Z) - 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) - Towards a multi-stakeholder value-based assessment framework for
algorithmic systems [76.79703106646967]
We develop a value-based assessment framework that visualizes closeness and tensions between values.
We give guidelines on how to operationalize them, while opening up the evaluation and deliberation process to a wide range of stakeholders.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-09T19:28:32Z) - Towards Implementing Responsible AI [22.514717870367623]
We propose four aspects of AI system design and development, adapting processes used in software engineering.
The salient findings cover four aspects of AI system design and development, adapting processes used in software engineering.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-09T14:59:23Z) - 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) - Principles to Practices for Responsible AI: Closing the Gap [0.1749935196721634]
We argue that an impact assessment framework is a promising approach to close the principles-to-practices gap.
We review a case study of AI's use in forest ecosystem restoration, demonstrating how an impact assessment framework can translate into effective and responsible AI practices.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-08T16:04:44Z) - On the Morality of Artificial Intelligence [154.69452301122175]
We propose conceptual and practical principles and guidelines for Machine Learning research and deployment.
We insist on concrete actions that can be taken by practitioners to pursue a more ethical and moral practice of ML aimed at using AI for social good.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2019-12-26T23:06:54Z)
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.