Trust or Bust: Ensuring Trustworthiness in Autonomous Weapon Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.10284v3
• Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 05:22:13 GMT
• Title: Trust or Bust: Ensuring Trustworthiness in Autonomous Weapon Systems
• Authors: Kasper Cools, Clara Maathuis,
• Abstract summary: This paper explores the multifaceted nature of trust in Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) It highlights the necessity of establishing reliable and transparent systems to mitigate risks associated with bias, operational failures, and accountability. It advocates for a collaborative approach that includes technologists, ethicists, and military strategists to address these ongoing challenges.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The integration of Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) into military operations presents both significant opportunities and challenges. This paper explores the multifaceted nature of trust in AWS, emphasising the necessity of establishing reliable and transparent systems to mitigate risks associated with bias, operational failures, and accountability. Despite advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI), the trustworthiness of these systems, especially in high-stakes military applications, remains a critical issue. Through a systematic review of existing literature, this research identifies gaps in the understanding of trust dynamics during the development and deployment phases of AWS. It advocates for a collaborative approach that includes technologists, ethicists, and military strategists to address these ongoing challenges. The findings underscore the importance of Human-Machine teaming and enhancing system intelligibility to ensure accountability and adherence to International Humanitarian Law. Ultimately, this paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on the ethical implications of AWS and the imperative for trustworthy AI in defense contexts.

Related papers

• 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)
• Trustworthy and Responsible AI for Human-Centric Autonomous Decision-Making Systems [2.444630714797783]
  We review and discuss the intricacies of AI biases, definitions, methods of detection and mitigation, and metrics for evaluating bias. We also discuss open challenges with regard to the trustworthiness and widespread application of AI across diverse domains of human-centric decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T06:04:25Z)
• AI Risk Management Should Incorporate Both Safety and Security [185.68738503122114]
  We argue that stakeholders in AI risk management should be aware of the nuances, synergies, and interplay between safety and security. We introduce a unified reference framework to clarify the differences and interplay between AI safety and AI security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T21:00:47Z)
• Quantifying AI Vulnerabilities: A Synthesis of Complexity, Dynamical Systems, and Game Theory [0.0]
  We propose a novel approach that introduces three metrics: System Complexity Index (SCI), Lyapunov Exponent for AI Stability (LEAIS), and Nash Equilibrium Robustness (NER) SCI quantifies the inherent complexity of an AI system, LEAIS captures its stability and sensitivity to perturbations, and NER evaluates its strategic robustness against adversarial manipulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-07T07:05:59Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• A Case for Competent AI Systems $-$ A Concept Note [0.3626013617212666]
  This note explores the concept of capability within AI systems, representing what the system is expected to deliver. The achievement of this capability may be hindered by deficiencies in implementation and testing. A central challenge arises in elucidating the competency of an AI system to execute tasks effectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-28T09:21:03Z)
• Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practices [44.67324097900778]
  Many current AI systems were found vulnerable to imperceptible attacks, biased against underrepresented groups, lacking in user privacy protection, etc. In this review, we strive to provide AI practitioners a comprehensive guide towards building trustworthy AI systems. To unify the current fragmented approaches towards trustworthy AI, we propose a systematic approach that considers the entire lifecycle of AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-04T03:20:39Z)
• Towards a Policy-as-a-Service Framework to Enable Compliant, Trustworthy AI and HRI Systems in the Wild [7.225523345649149]
  Building trustworthy autonomous systems is challenging for many reasons beyond simply trying to engineer agents that 'always do the right thing' There is a broader context that is often not considered within AI and HRI: that the problem of trustworthiness is inherently socio-technical. This paper emphasizes the "fuzzy" socio-technical aspects of trustworthiness and the need for their careful consideration during both design and deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-06T18:32:31Z)
• 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.