Attributing Responsibility in AI-Induced Incidents: A Computational Reflective Equilibrium Framework for Accountability
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.16957v1
- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 18:11:03 GMT
- Title: Attributing Responsibility in AI-Induced Incidents: A Computational Reflective Equilibrium Framework for Accountability
- Authors: Yunfei Ge, Quanyan Zhu,
- Abstract summary: The pervasive integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has introduced complex challenges in the responsibility and accountability in the event of incidents involving AI-enabled systems.
This work proposes a coherent and ethically acceptable responsibility attribution framework for all stakeholders.
- Score: 13.343937277604892
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: The pervasive integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has introduced complex challenges in the responsibility and accountability in the event of incidents involving AI-enabled systems. The interconnectivity of these systems, ethical concerns of AI-induced incidents, coupled with uncertainties in AI technology and the absence of corresponding regulations, have made traditional responsibility attribution challenging. To this end, this work proposes a Computational Reflective Equilibrium (CRE) approach to establish a coherent and ethically acceptable responsibility attribution framework for all stakeholders. The computational approach provides a structured analysis that overcomes the limitations of conceptual approaches in dealing with dynamic and multifaceted scenarios, showcasing the framework's explainability, coherence, and adaptivity properties in the responsibility attribution process. We examine the pivotal role of the initial activation level associated with claims in equilibrium computation. Using an AI-assisted medical decision-support system as a case study, we illustrate how different initializations lead to diverse responsibility distributions. The framework offers valuable insights into accountability in AI-induced incidents, facilitating the development of a sustainable and resilient system through continuous monitoring, revision, and reflection.
Related papers
- Causal Responsibility Attribution for Human-AI Collaboration [62.474732677086855]
This paper presents a causal framework using Structural Causal Models (SCMs) to systematically attribute responsibility in human-AI systems.
Two case studies illustrate the framework's adaptability in diverse human-AI collaboration scenarios.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-05T17:17:45Z) - An Adaptive Framework for Generating Systematic Explanatory Answer in Online Q&A Platforms [62.878616839799776]
We propose SynthRAG, an innovative framework designed to enhance Question Answering (QA) performance.
SynthRAG improves on conventional models by employing adaptive outlines for dynamic content structuring.
An online deployment on the Zhihu platform revealed that SynthRAG's answers achieved notable user engagement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-23T09:14:57Z) - Computational Grounding of Responsibility Attribution and Anticipation in LTLf [25.988412601884182]
Responsibility is a multi-faceted notion involving counterfactual reasoning about actions and strategies.
We show a connection with notions in reactive synthesis, including synthesis of winning, dominant, and best-effort strategies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-18T15:38:33Z) - Investigating the Role of Instruction Variety and Task Difficulty in Robotic Manipulation Tasks [50.75902473813379]
This work introduces a comprehensive evaluation framework that systematically examines the role of instructions and inputs in the generalisation abilities of such models.
The proposed framework uncovers the resilience of multimodal models to extreme instruction perturbations and their vulnerability to observational changes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-04T14:36:49Z) - 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) - Unravelling Responsibility for AI [0.8836921728313208]
It is widely acknowledged that we need to establish where responsibility lies for the outputs and impacts of AI-enabled systems.
This paper draws upon central distinctions in philosophy and law to clarify the concept of responsibility for AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-04T13:12:17Z) - Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility,
and Robustness in Machine Learning [4.958893997693021]
In 1996, Nissenbaum issued a clarion call concerning the erosion of accountability in society due to the ubiquitous delegation of consequential functions to computerized systems.
We revisit Nissenbaum's original paper in relation to the ascendance of data-driven algorithmic systems.
We discuss how the barriers present difficulties for instantiating a unified moral, relational framework in practice for data-driven algorithmic systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-02-10T21:39:02Z) - Accountability in AI: From Principles to Industry-specific Accreditation [4.033641609534416]
Recent AI-related scandals have shed a spotlight on accountability in AI.
This paper draws on literature from public policy and governance to make two contributions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-08T16:37:11Z) - Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome.
Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations.
We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z) - 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.