The potential functions of an international institution for AI safety. Insights from adjacent policy areas and recent trends
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.10536v1
- Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 10:04:53 GMT
- Title: The potential functions of an international institution for AI safety. Insights from adjacent policy areas and recent trends
- Authors: A. Leone De Castris, C. Thomas,
- Abstract summary: The OECD, the G7, the G20, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe have already started developing frameworks for ethical and responsible AI governance.
This chapter reflects on what functions an international AI safety institute could perform.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: Governments, industry, and other actors involved in governing AI technologies around the world agree that, while AI offers tremendous promise to benefit the world, appropriate guardrails are required to mitigate risks. Global institutions, including the OECD, the G7, the G20, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe, have already started developing frameworks for ethical and responsible AI governance. While these are important initial steps, they alone fall short of addressing the need for institutionalised international processes to identify and assess potentially harmful AI capabilities. Contributing to the relevant conversation on how to address this gap, this chapter reflects on what functions an international AI safety institute could perform. Based on the analysis of both existing international governance models addressing safety considerations in adjacent policy areas and the newly established national AI safety institutes in the UK and US, the chapter identifies a list of concrete functions that could be performed at the international level. While creating a new international body is not the only way forward, understanding the structure of these bodies from a modular perspective can help us to identify the tools at our disposal. These, we suggest, can be categorised under three functional domains: a) technical research and cooperation, b) safeguards and evaluations, c) policymaking and governance support.
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) - Attack Atlas: A Practitioner's Perspective on Challenges and Pitfalls in Red Teaming GenAI [52.138044013005]
generative AI, particularly large language models (LLMs), become increasingly integrated into production applications.
New attack surfaces and vulnerabilities emerge and put a focus on adversarial threats in natural language and multi-modal systems.
Red-teaming has gained importance in proactively identifying weaknesses in these systems, while blue-teaming works to protect against such adversarial attacks.
This work aims to bridge the gap between academic insights and practical security measures for the protection of generative AI systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-23T10:18:10Z) - The Role of AI Safety Institutes in Contributing to International Standards for Frontier AI Safety [0.0]
We argue that the AI Safety Institutes (AISIs) are well-positioned to contribute to the international standard-setting processes for AI safety.
We propose and evaluate three models for involvement: Seoul Declaration Signatories, US (and other Seoul Declaration Signatories) and China, and Globally Inclusive.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-17T16:12:54Z) - Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systems [88.80306881112313]
We will introduce and define a family of approaches to AI safety, which we will refer to as guaranteed safe (GS) AI.
The core feature of these approaches is that they aim to produce AI systems which are equipped with high-assurance quantitative safety guarantees.
We outline a number of approaches for creating each of these three core components, describe the main technical challenges, and suggest a number of potential solutions to them.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-10T17:38:32Z) - Towards a Privacy and Security-Aware Framework for Ethical AI: Guiding
the Development and Assessment of AI Systems [0.0]
This study conducts a systematic literature review spanning the years 2020 to 2023.
Through the synthesis of knowledge extracted from the SLR, this study presents a conceptual framework tailored for privacy- and security-aware AI systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-13T15:39:57Z) - Responsible Artificial Intelligence: A Structured Literature Review [0.0]
The EU has recently issued several publications emphasizing the necessity of trust in AI.
This highlights the urgent need for international regulation.
This paper introduces a comprehensive and, to our knowledge, the first unified definition of responsible AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-11T17:01:13Z) - International Institutions for Advanced AI [47.449762587672986]
International institutions may have an important role to play in ensuring advanced AI systems benefit humanity.
This paper identifies a set of governance functions that could be performed at an international level to address these challenges.
It groups these functions into four institutional models that exhibit internal synergies and have precedents in existing organizations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-10T16:55:55Z) - Foundations for the Future: Institution building for the purpose of
Artificial Intelligence governance [0.0]
Governance efforts for artificial intelligence (AI) are taking on increasingly more concrete forms.
New institutions will need to be established on a national and international level.
This paper sketches a blueprint of such institutions, and conducts in-depth investigations of three key components of any future AI governance institutions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-01T10:45:04Z) - 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) - Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable
Claims [59.64274607533249]
AI developers need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable.
This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems.
We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose--spanning institutions, software, and hardware--and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-15T17:15:35Z)
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.