AI Ethics: A Bibliometric Analysis, Critical Issues, and Key Gaps

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14681v1
• Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 21:43:21 GMT
• Title: AI Ethics: A Bibliometric Analysis, Critical Issues, and Key Gaps
• Authors: Di Kevin Gao, Andrew Haverly, Sudip Mittal, Jiming Wu, Jingdao Chen,
• Abstract summary: This study conducts a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the AI ethics literature over the past two decades. They present seven key AI ethics issues, encompassing the Collingridge dilemma, the AI status debate, challenges associated with AI transparency and explainability, privacy protection complications, considerations of justice and fairness, concerns about algocracy and human enfeeblement, and the issue of superintelligence.
• Score: 3.8214695776749013
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) ethics has emerged as a burgeoning yet pivotal area of scholarly research. This study conducts a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the AI ethics literature over the past two decades. The analysis reveals a discernible tripartite progression, characterized by an incubation phase, followed by a subsequent phase focused on imbuing AI with human-like attributes, culminating in a third phase emphasizing the development of human-centric AI systems. After that, they present seven key AI ethics issues, encompassing the Collingridge dilemma, the AI status debate, challenges associated with AI transparency and explainability, privacy protection complications, considerations of justice and fairness, concerns about algocracy and human enfeeblement, and the issue of superintelligence. Finally, they identify two notable research gaps in AI ethics regarding the large ethics model (LEM) and AI identification and extend an invitation for further scholarly research.

Related papers

• Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment: A Systematic Review for Clarifications, Framework, and Future Directions [101.67121669727354]
  Recent advancements in AI have highlighted the importance of guiding AI systems towards the intended goals, ethical principles, and values of individuals and groups, a concept broadly recognized as alignment. The lack of clarified definitions and scopes of human-AI alignment poses a significant obstacle, hampering collaborative efforts across research domains to achieve this alignment. We introduce a systematic review of over 400 papers published between 2019 and January 2024, spanning multiple domains such as Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• A Bibliometric View of AI Ethics Development [4.0998481751764]
  We perform a bibliometric analysis of AI Ethics literature for the last 20 years based on keyword search. We conjecture that the next phase of AI ethics is likely to focus on making AI more machine-like as AI matches or surpasses humans intellectually.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-08T16:36:55Z)
• Advancing Explainable AI Toward Human-Like Intelligence: Forging the Path to Artificial Brain [0.7770029179741429]
  The intersection of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and neuroscience in Explainable AI (XAI) is pivotal for enhancing transparency and interpretability in complex decision-making processes. This paper explores the evolution of XAI methodologies, ranging from feature-based to human-centric approaches. The challenges in achieving explainability in generative models, ensuring responsible AI practices, and addressing ethical implications are discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T14:09:11Z)
• Towards a Feminist Metaethics of AI [0.0]
  I argue that these insufficiencies could be mitigated by developing a research agenda for a feminist metaethics of AI. Applying this perspective to the context of AI, I suggest that a feminist metaethics of AI would examine: (i) the continuity between theory and action in AI ethics; (ii) the real-life effects of AI ethics; (iii) the role and profile of those involved in AI ethics; and (iv) the effects of AI on power relations through methods that pay attention to context, emotions and narrative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-10T13:26:45Z)
• Towards A Unified Utilitarian Ethics Framework for Healthcare Artificial Intelligence [0.08192907805418582]
  This study attempts to identify the major ethical principles influencing the utility performance of AI at different technological levels. Justice, privacy, bias, lack of regulations, risks, and interpretability are the most important principles to consider for ethical AI. We propose a new utilitarian ethics-based theoretical framework for designing ethical AI for the healthcare domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-26T02:10:58Z)
• Analyzing Character and Consciousness in AI-Generated Social Content: A Case Study of Chirper, the AI Social Network [0.0]
  The study embarks on a comprehensive exploration of AI behavior, analyzing the effects of diverse settings on Chirper's responses. Through a series of cognitive tests, the study gauges the self-awareness and pattern recognition prowess of Chirpers. An intriguing aspect of the research is the exploration of the potential influence of a Chirper's handle or personality type on its performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-30T15:40:18Z)
• The Role of AI in Drug Discovery: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies [97.5153823429076]
  The benefits, challenges and drawbacks of AI in this field are reviewed. The use of data augmentation, explainable AI, and the integration of AI with traditional experimental methods are also discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-08T23:23:39Z)
• 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)
• Metaethical Perspectives on 'Benchmarking' AI Ethics [81.65697003067841]
  Benchmarks are seen as the cornerstone for measuring technical progress in Artificial Intelligence (AI) research. An increasingly prominent research area in AI is ethics, which currently has no set of benchmarks nor commonly accepted way for measuring the 'ethicality' of an AI system. We argue that it makes more sense to talk about 'values' rather than 'ethics' when considering the possible actions of present and future AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-11T14:36:39Z)
• Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspective [54.80482955088197]
  We focus on six of the most crucial dimensions in achieving trustworthy AI: (i) Safety & Robustness, (ii) Non-discrimination & Fairness, (iii) Explainability, (iv) Privacy, (v) Accountability & Auditability, and (vi) Environmental Well-Being. For each dimension, we review the recent related technologies according to a taxonomy and summarize their applications in real-world systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-12T14:21:46Z)
• Building Bridges: Generative Artworks to Explore AI Ethics [56.058588908294446]
  In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on understanding and mitigating adverse impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society. A significant challenge in the design of ethical AI systems is that there are multiple stakeholders in the AI pipeline, each with their own set of constraints and interests. This position paper outlines some potential ways in which generative artworks can play this role by serving as accessible and powerful educational tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T22:31:55Z)

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.