Generative AI Needs Adaptive Governance
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.04554v1
- Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 23:47:14 GMT
- Title: Generative AI Needs Adaptive Governance
- Authors: Anka Reuel, Trond Arne Undheim,
- Abstract summary: 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.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Because of the speed of its development, broad scope of application, and its ability to augment human performance, generative AI challenges the very notions of governance, trust, and human agency. The technology's capacity to mimic human knowledge work, feedback loops including significant uptick in users, research, investor, policy, and media attention, data and compute resources, all lead to rapidly increasing capabilities. For those reasons, adaptive governance, where AI governance and AI co-evolve, is essential for governing generative AI. In sharp contrast to traditional governance's regulatory regimes that are based on a mix of rigid one-and-done provisions for disclosure, registration and risk management, which in the case of AI carry the potential for regulatory misalignment, this paper argues that generative AI calls for adaptive governance. We define adaptive governance in the context of AI and outline an adaptive AI governance framework. We outline actors, roles, as well as both shared and actors-specific policy activities. We further provide examples of how the framework could be operationalized in practice. We then explain that the adaptive AI governance stance is not without its risks and limitations, such as insufficient oversight, insufficient depth, regulatory uncertainty, and regulatory capture, and provide potential approaches to fix these shortcomings.
Related papers
- 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) - Open Problems in Technical AI Governance [93.89102632003996]
Technical AI governance refers to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI.
This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-20T21:13:56Z) - Challenges and Best Practices in Corporate AI Governance:Lessons from the Biopharmaceutical Industry [0.0]
We discuss challenges that any organization attempting to operationalize AI governance will have to face.
These include questions concerning how to define the material scope of AI governance.
We hope to provide project managers, AI practitioners, and data privacy officers responsible for designing and implementing AI governance frameworks with general best practices.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-07T12:01:42Z) - Computing Power and the Governance of Artificial Intelligence [51.967584623262674]
Governments and companies have started to leverage compute as a means to govern AI.
compute-based policies and technologies have the potential to assist in these areas, but there is significant variation in their readiness for implementation.
naive or poorly scoped approaches to compute governance carry significant risks in areas like privacy, economic impacts, and centralization of power.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-13T21:10:21Z) - Taking Training Seriously: Human Guidance and Management-Based Regulation of Artificial Intelligence [0.0]
We discuss the connection between the emerging management-based regulatory frameworks governing AI and the need for human oversight during training.
We argue that the kinds of high-stakes use cases for AI that appear of most concern to regulators should lean more on human-guided training than on data-only training.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-13T13:48:54Z) - 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) - Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress [171.05448842016125]
We describe risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems.
There is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them.
Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-26T17:59:06Z) - A multilevel framework for AI governance [6.230751621285321]
We propose a multilevel governance approach that involves governments, corporations, and citizens.
The levels of governance combined with the dimensions of trust in AI provide practical insights that can be used to further enhance user experiences and inform public policy related to AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-04T03:59:16Z) - Putting AI Ethics into Practice: The Hourglass Model of Organizational
AI Governance [0.0]
We present an AI governance framework, which targets organizations that develop and use AI systems.
The framework is designed to help organizations deploying AI systems translate ethical AI principles into practice.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-01T08:55:27Z) - 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) - Regulating Artificial Intelligence: Proposal for a Global Solution [6.037312672659089]
We argue that AI-related challenges cannot be tackled effectively without sincere international coordination.
We propose the establishment of an international AI governance framework organized around a new AI regulatory agency.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-22T09:24:07Z)
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.