Navigating Fairness: Practitioners' Understanding, Challenges, and Strategies in AI/ML Development
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.15481v2
- Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:47:24 GMT
- Title: Navigating Fairness: Practitioners' Understanding, Challenges, and Strategies in AI/ML Development
- Authors: Aastha Pant, Rashina Hoda, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, Burak Turhan,
- Abstract summary: There is a lack of empirical studies focused on understanding the perspectives and experiences of AI practitioners in developing a fair AI/ML system.
We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 AI practitioners to investigate their understanding of what a 'fair AI/ML' is, the challenges they face in developing a fair AI/ML system, the consequences of developing an unfair AI/ML system, and the strategies they employ to ensure AI/ML system fairness.
This study provides actionable insights to enhance AI/ML fairness, which may promote fairer systems, reduce bias, and foster public trust in AI technologies.
- Score: 11.846525587357489
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
- Abstract: The rise in the use of AI/ML applications across industries has sparked more discussions about the fairness of AI/ML in recent times. While prior research on the fairness of AI/ML exists, there is a lack of empirical studies focused on understanding the perspectives and experiences of AI practitioners in developing a fair AI/ML system. Understanding AI practitioners' perspectives and experiences on the fairness of AI/ML systems are important because they are directly involved in its development and deployment and their insights can offer valuable real-world perspectives on the challenges associated with ensuring fairness in AI/ML systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 AI practitioners to investigate their understanding of what a 'fair AI/ML' is, the challenges they face in developing a fair AI/ML system, the consequences of developing an unfair AI/ML system, and the strategies they employ to ensure AI/ML system fairness. We developed a framework showcasing the relationship between AI practitioners' understanding of 'fair AI/ML' system and (i) their challenges in its development, (ii) the consequences of developing an unfair AI/ML system, and (iii) strategies used to ensure AI/ML system fairness. By exploring AI practitioners' perspectives and experiences, this study provides actionable insights to enhance AI/ML fairness, which may promote fairer systems, reduce bias, and foster public trust in AI technologies. Additionally, we also identify areas for further investigation and offer recommendations to aid AI practitioners and AI companies in navigating fairness.
Related papers
- Diversity and Inclusion in AI: Insights from a Survey of AI/ML Practitioners [4.761639988815896]
Growing awareness of social biases and inequalities embedded in Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems has brought increased attention to the integration of Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) principles throughout the AI lifecycle.<n>Despite the rise of ethical AI guidelines, there is limited empirical evidence on how D&I is applied in real-world settings.<n>This study explores how AI and Machine Learning(ML) practitioners perceive and implement D&I principles and identifies organisational challenges that hinder their effective adoption.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-24T05:40:23Z) - Imagining and building wise machines: The centrality of AI metacognition [78.76893632793497]
We argue that shortcomings stem from one overarching failure: AI systems lack wisdom.
While AI research has focused on task-level strategies, metacognition is underdeveloped in AI systems.
We propose that integrating metacognitive capabilities into AI systems is crucial for enhancing their robustness, explainability, cooperation, and safety.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-04T18:10:10Z) - Can We Trust AI Agents? An Experimental Study Towards Trustworthy LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems for AI Ethics [10.084913433923566]
This study examines how trustworthiness-enhancing techniques affect ethical AI output generation.
We design the prototype LLM-BMAS, where agents engage in structured discussions on real-world ethical AI issues.
Discussions reveal terms like bias detection, transparency, accountability, user consent, compliance, fairness evaluation, and EU AI Act compliance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-25T20:17:59Z) - What do AI/ML practitioners think about AI/ML bias? [11.846525587357489]
Our studies have revealed a discrepancy between practitioners' understanding of 'AI/ML bias' and the definitions of tech companies and researchers.
These efforts could yield a significant return on investment by aiding AI/ML practitioners in developing unbiased AI/ML systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-11T23:43:25Z) - The Impossibility of Fair LLMs [59.424918263776284]
The need for fair AI is increasingly clear in the era of large language models (LLMs)
We review the technical frameworks that machine learning researchers have used to evaluate fairness.
We develop guidelines for the more realistic goal of achieving fairness in particular use cases.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-28T04:36:15Z) - Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
General purpose AI seems to have lowered the barriers for the public to use AI and harness its power.
We introduce PARTICIP-AI, a framework for laypeople to speculate and assess AI use cases and their impacts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z) - Testing autonomous vehicles and AI: perspectives and challenges from cybersecurity, transparency, robustness and fairness [53.91018508439669]
The study explores the complexities of integrating Artificial Intelligence into Autonomous Vehicles (AVs)
It examines the challenges introduced by AI components and the impact on testing procedures.
The paper identifies significant challenges and suggests future directions for research and development of AI in AV technology.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-21T08:29:42Z) - POLARIS: A framework to guide the development of Trustworthy AI systems [3.02243271391691]
There is a significant gap between high-level AI ethics principles and low-level concrete practices for AI professionals.
We develop a novel holistic framework for Trustworthy AI - designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice.
Our goal is to empower AI professionals to confidently navigate the ethical dimensions of Trustworthy AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-08T01:05:16Z) - Investigating Responsible AI for Scientific Research: An Empirical Study [4.597781832707524]
The push for Responsible AI (RAI) in such institutions underscores the increasing emphasis on integrating ethical considerations within AI design and development.
This paper aims to assess the awareness and preparedness regarding the ethical risks inherent in AI design and development.
Our results have revealed certain knowledge gaps concerning ethical, responsible, and inclusive AI, with limitations in awareness of the available AI ethics frameworks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-15T06:40:27Z) - Inherent Limitations of AI Fairness [16.588468396705366]
The study of AI fairness has rapidly developed into a rich field of research with links to computer science, social science, law, and philosophy.
Many technical solutions for measuring and achieving AI fairness have been proposed, yet their approach has been criticized in recent years for being misleading, unrealistic and harmful.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-13T11:23:24Z) - 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) - 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) - 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) - 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)
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.