Considering Fundamental Rights in the European Standardisation of Artificial Intelligence: Nonsense or Strategic Alliance?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.16869v1
• Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 10:17:42 GMT
• Title: Considering Fundamental Rights in the European Standardisation of Artificial Intelligence: Nonsense or Strategic Alliance?
• Authors: Marion Ho-Dac,
• Abstract summary: This chapter aims to clarify the relationship between AI standards and fundamental rights. The main issue tackled is whether the adoption of AI harmonised standards, based on the future AI Act, should take into account fundamental rights.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In the European context, both the EU AI Act proposal and the draft Standardisation Request on safe and trustworthy AI link standardisation to fundamental rights. However, these texts do not provide any guidelines that specify and detail the relationship between AI standards and fundamental rights, its meaning or implication. This chapter aims to clarify this critical regulatory blind spot. The main issue tackled is whether the adoption of AI harmonised standards, based on the future AI Act, should take into account fundamental rights. In our view, the response is yes. The high risks posed by certain AI systems relate in particular to infringements of fundamental rights. Therefore, mitigating such risks involves fundamental rights considerations and this is what future harmonised standards should reflect. At the same time, valid criticisms of the European standardisation process have to be addressed. Finally, the practical incorporation of fundamental rights considerations in the ongoing European standardisation of AI systems is discussed.

Related papers

• Technology as uncharted territory: Contextual integrity and the notion of AI as new ethical ground [55.2480439325792]
  I argue that efforts to promote responsible and ethical AI can inadvertently contribute to and seemingly legitimize this disregard for established contextual norms. I question the current narrow prioritization in AI ethics of moral innovation over moral preservation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-06T15:36:13Z)
• The Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA) in the AI Act: Roots, legal obligations and key elements for a model template [55.2480439325792]
  Article aims to fill existing gaps in the theoretical and methodological elaboration of the Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA) This article outlines the main building blocks of a model template for the FRIA. It can serve as a blueprint for other national and international regulatory initiatives to ensure that AI is fully consistent with human rights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-07T11:55:55Z)
• 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)
• The Artificial Intelligence Act: critical overview [0.0]
  This article provides a critical overview of the recently approved Artificial Intelligence Act. It starts by presenting the main structure, objectives, and approach of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. The text concludes that even if the overall framework can be deemed adequate and balanced, the approach is so complex that it risks defeating its own purpose.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-30T21:38:02Z)
• 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)
• The European AI Liability Directives -- Critique of a Half-Hearted Approach and Lessons for the Future [0.0]
  The European Commission advanced two proposals outlining the European approach to AI liability in September 2022. The latter does not contain any individual rights of affected persons, and the former lack specific, substantive rules on AI development and deployment. Taken together, these acts may well trigger a Brussels Effect in AI regulation, with significant consequences for the US and beyond. I propose to jump-start sustainable AI regulation via sustainability impact assessments in the AI Act and sustainable design defects in the liability regime.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-25T09:08:11Z)
• Negative Human Rights as a Basis for Long-term AI Safety and Regulation [1.5229257192293197]
  General principles guiding autonomous AI systems to recognize and avoid harmful behaviours may need to be supported by a binding system of regulation. They should also be specific enough for technical implementation. This article draws inspiration from law to explain how negative human rights could fulfil the role of such principles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-31T11:57:13Z)
• 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)

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.