Trust AI Regulation? Discerning users are vital to build trust and effective AI regulation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.09510v1
• Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 15:56:39 GMT
• Title: Trust AI Regulation? Discerning users are vital to build trust and effective AI regulation
• Authors: Zainab Alalawi, Paolo Bova, Theodor Cimpeanu, Alessandro Di Stefano, Manh Hong Duong, Elias Fernandez Domingos, The Anh Han, Marcus Krellner, Bianca Ogbo, Simon T. Powers, Filippo Zimmaro,
• Abstract summary: We show that creating trustworthy AI and user trust requires regulators to be incentivised to regulate effectively. We demonstrate the effectiveness of two mechanisms that can achieve this. We then consider an alternative solution, where users can condition their trust decision on the effectiveness of the regulators.
• Score: 32.98110040460262
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: There is general agreement that some form of regulation is necessary both for AI creators to be incentivised to develop trustworthy systems, and for users to actually trust those systems. But there is much debate about what form these regulations should take and how they should be implemented. Most work in this area has been qualitative, and has not been able to make formal predictions. Here, we propose that evolutionary game theory can be used to quantitatively model the dilemmas faced by users, AI creators, and regulators, and provide insights into the possible effects of different regulatory regimes. We show that creating trustworthy AI and user trust requires regulators to be incentivised to regulate effectively. We demonstrate the effectiveness of two mechanisms that can achieve this. The first is where governments can recognise and reward regulators that do a good job. In that case, if the AI system is not too risky for users then some level of trustworthy development and user trust evolves. We then consider an alternative solution, where users can condition their trust decision on the effectiveness of the regulators. This leads to effective regulation, and consequently the development of trustworthy AI and user trust, provided that the cost of implementing regulations is not too high. Our findings highlight the importance of considering the effect of different regulatory regimes from an evolutionary game theoretic perspective.

Related papers

• 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)
• 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)
• A Diachronic Perspective on User Trust in AI under Uncertainty [52.44939679369428]
  Modern NLP systems are often uncalibrated, resulting in confidently incorrect predictions that undermine user trust. We study the evolution of user trust in response to trust-eroding events using a betting game.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T14:41:46Z)
• Who to Trust, How and Why: Untangling AI Ethics Principles, Trustworthiness and Trust [0.0]
  We argue for the need to distinguish these concepts more clearly. We discuss that trust in AI involves not only reliance on the system itself, but also trust in the developers of the AI system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-19T05:00:34Z)
• Both eyes open: Vigilant Incentives help Regulatory Markets improve AI Safety [69.59465535312815]
  Regulatory Markets for AI is a proposal designed with adaptability in mind. It involves governments setting outcome-based targets for AI companies to achieve. We warn that it is alarmingly easy to stumble on incentives which would prevent Regulatory Markets from achieving this goal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-06T14:42:05Z)
• Designing for Responsible Trust in AI Systems: A Communication Perspective [56.80107647520364]
  We draw from communication theories and literature on trust in technologies to develop a conceptual model called MATCH. We highlight transparency and interaction as AI systems' affordances that present a wide range of trustworthiness cues to users. We propose a checklist of requirements to help technology creators identify appropriate cues to use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-29T00:14:33Z)
• 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)
• Filling gaps in trustworthy development of AI [20.354549569362035]
  Growing awareness of potential risks from AI systems has spurred action to address those risks. But the principles often leave a gap between the "what" and the "how" of trustworthy AI development. There is thus an urgent need for concrete methods that both enable AI developers to prevent harm and allow them to demonstrate their trustworthiness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-14T22:45:28Z)
• The Sanction of Authority: Promoting Public Trust in AI [4.729969944853141]
  We argue that public distrust of AI originates from the under-development of a regulatory ecosystem that would guarantee the trustworthiness of the AIs that pervade society. We elaborate the pivotal role of externally auditable AI documentation within this model and the work to be done to ensure it is effective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-22T22:01:30Z)

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.