Taking Training Seriously: Human Guidance and Management-Based Regulation of Artificial Intelligence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.08466v2
• Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 02:45:49 GMT
• Title: Taking Training Seriously: Human Guidance and Management-Based Regulation of Artificial Intelligence
• Authors: Cary Coglianese, Colton R. Crum,
• Abstract summary: We discuss the connection between the emerging management-based regulatory frameworks governing AI and the need for human oversight during training. We argue that the kinds of high-stakes use cases for AI that appear of most concern to regulators should lean more on human-guided training than on data-only training.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Fervent calls for more robust governance of the harms associated with artificial intelligence (AI) are leading to the adoption around the world of what regulatory scholars have called a management-based approach to regulation. Recent initiatives in the United States and Europe, as well as the adoption of major self-regulatory standards by the International Organization for Standardization, share in common a core management-based paradigm. These management-based initiatives seek to motivate an increase in human oversight of how AI tools are trained and developed. Refinements and systematization of human-guided training techniques will thus be needed to fit within this emerging era of management-based regulatory paradigm. If taken seriously, human-guided training can alleviate some of the technical and ethical pressures on AI, boosting AI performance with human intuition as well as better addressing the needs for fairness and effective explainability. In this paper, we discuss the connection between the emerging management-based regulatory frameworks governing AI and the need for human oversight during training. We broadly cover some of the technical components involved in human-guided training and then argue that the kinds of high-stakes use cases for AI that appear of most concern to regulators should lean more on human-guided training than on data-only training. We hope to foster a discussion between legal scholars and computer scientists involving how to govern a domain of technology that is vast, heterogenous, and dynamic in its applications and risks.

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)
• Open Problems in Technical AI Governance [93.89102632003996]
  Technical AI governance refers to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI. This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T21:13:56Z)
• Challenges and Best Practices in Corporate AI Governance:Lessons from the Biopharmaceutical Industry [0.0]
  We discuss challenges that any organization attempting to operationalize AI governance will have to face. These include questions concerning how to define the material scope of AI governance. We hope to provide project managers, AI practitioners, and data privacy officers responsible for designing and implementing AI governance frameworks with general best practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-07T12:01:42Z)
• Human Oversight of Artificial Intelligence and Technical Standardisation [0.0]
  Within the global governance of AI, the requirement for human oversight is embodied in several regulatory formats. The EU legislator is therefore going much further than in the past in "spelling out" the legal requirement for human oversight. The question of the place of humans in the AI decision-making process should be given particular attention.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T07:43:46Z)
• Generative AI Needs Adaptive Governance [0.0]
  generative AI challenges the notions of governance, trust, and human agency. This paper argues that generative AI calls for adaptive governance. We outline actors, roles, as well as both shared and actors-specific policy activities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T23:47:14Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• 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)
• Putting AI Ethics into Practice: The Hourglass Model of Organizational AI Governance [0.0]
  We present an AI governance framework, which targets organizations that develop and use AI systems. The framework is designed to help organizations deploying AI systems translate ethical AI principles into practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-01T08:55:27Z)
• 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)
• AI Governance for Businesses [2.072259480917207]
  It aims at leveraging AI through effective use of data and minimization of AI-related cost and risk. This work views AI products as systems, where key functionality is delivered by machine learning (ML) models leveraging (training) data. Our framework decomposes AI governance into governance of data, (ML) models and (AI) systems along four dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-20T22:31:37Z)

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.