Ethics Guidelines For Trustworthy AI
Written by Nikos Vaggalis   
Monday, 22 April 2019
Article Index
Ethics Guidelines For Trustworthy AI
In Detail

 

Chapter I - Foundations of Trustworthy AI focuses on four ethical principles, rooted in fundamental rights, which must be respected in order to ensure that AI systems are developed, deployed and used in a trustworthy manner. Those principles are:

(i). Respect for human autonomy
AI should help humans and not manipulate them.

(ii). Prevention of harm
AIs should not do harm, be it mentally or physically. Also "they must be technically robust and it should be ensured that they are not open to malicious use". Let me start by saying that this one is hard to safeguard.

The 2016 Microsoft's AI Twitter chatbot incident serves as such a lesson. The researchers' intention was that the chatbot, Tay, would be capable of acquiring intelligence through conversations with humans. Instead it was tricked into altering its innocent and admittedly naive personality resembling a teenage girl, to adopt an anti-feminist and racist character. Later Microsoft admitted to there being a bug in its design. This goes to remind us that after all AI is just software and thus prone to the same issues that any program faces throughout its existence.

In extent, who can tell what will happen if the software agents that power robotic hardware get hacked or infected with a virus? How can we make adequate precautions against such an act?

You could argue that this is human malice and that with appropriate safety nets it can be avoided. Reality is quick to prove this notion false as bugs in any piece of software ever developed, leading to vulnerabilities or malfunctions, are discovered every day. But for the sake of continuing this argument let's pretend that humans develop bug-free software, something that eradicates the possibility of hacking and virus spreading. Then, what about the case of the machine self-modifying and self-evolving their core base?

(iii) Fairness
Free from unfair bias, discrimination and stigmatization.

It is a well known secret that AI's reflect the biases of their makers. For example, the case where the resume sorting algorithms would derive the race of the candidates from their CV and use it either against them or for them when deciding to promote them or not.

(iv) Explicability
As AI becomes more and more integrated into all aspects of human activity, there's a pressing need to find a way to peek into its decision making process.This is very important in sectors such as Healthcare, which are critical to humans' wellbeing.And for it to be trustworthy it should be able to explain its actions, not act as a black box.

An example of that we explored in "TCAV Explains How AI Reaches A Decision", where we saw the example SkinVision, a mobile app that by taking a picture of a mole can decide if its malignant or not. Would the diagnosis be incorrect or misinterpreting a malignant mole as benign could have dire consequences.But the other way around is not without defects as well.It would cause uninvited stress to its users and turn them into an army of pseudo-patients who would come knowing down their already burned out practitioner's door.

For such an AI algorithm to be successful, it's of foremost importance to be able to replicate the doctor's actions. In other words, it has to be able to act as doctor, leveraging his knowledge. But why is it so necessary for the algorithm to be blindly trusted, for the diagnosis to be autonomous?

Because: 

Across the globe, health systems are facing the problem of growing populations, increasing occurrence of skin cancer and a squeeze on resources. We see technology such as our own as becoming ever more integrated within the health system, to both ensure that those who need treatment are made aware of it and that those who have an unfounded concern do not take up valuable time and resources. This integration will not only save money but will be vital in bringing down the mortality rate due to earlier diagnosis and will help with the further expansion of the specialism.

Then, there's the possibility of tensions arising between those principles as in situations where "the principle of prevention of harm and the principle of human autonomy may be in conflict".
An example of that is that using surveillance for preventing harm, conflicts with the right of people to privacy. In "OpenFace - Face Recognition For All" we saw an example of that applied to face recognition technologies.

There are many applications besides surveillance, such as
for identity verification in order to eliminate impersonation, VR and gaming, or even making business more customer-centric by helping them identify returning customers but on the other hand, the use of such a technology raises many privacy and civil liberty concerns, as in the hands of an authoritative government could become a tool for controlling the masses.

It also compromises privacy by tracking public activity by introducing the ability of linking physical presence to places a person has been, something that until now was only feasible through credit card transaction monitoring or capturing the MAC address of their mobile device. Imagine the ethical scope arising of personalized advertising..

Potentially it contributes to an already troublesome scenario where privacy and its protective measures like cryptography are heavily attacked, blurring the line between evading privacy and using surveillance as a countermeasure to crime and terror.

As expected, there's no fixed recommendations in cases like this since they are deemed too fluid to reach a solid conclusion, a situation worsen by the law's and ethics' incapability in keeping up with the challenges such a technology heralds.As such law and ethics have no answer to any of the aforementioned dilemmas.One thing is for certain, however - this technology grants great power and with great power comes great responsibility. 

Chapter II: Realizing Trustworthy AI

This chapter in essence, reiterates the concepts met in the previous one, but in more concrete terms via a list of seven requirements:

  1. Human agency and oversight
    Including fundamental rights, human agency and human oversight

  2. Technical robustness and safety
    Including resilience to attack and security, fall back plan and general safety, accuracy, reliability and reproducibility

  3. Privacy and data governance
    Including respect for privacy, quality and integrity of data, and access to data

  4. Transparency
    Including traceability, explainability and communication

  5. Diversity, non-discrimination and fairness
    Including the avoidance of unfair bias, accessibility and universal design, and stakeholder participation

  6. Societal and environmental wellbeing
    Including sustainability and environmental friendliness, social impact, society and democracy

  7. Accountability
    Including auditability, minimisation and reporting of negative impact, trade-offs and redress.  

The chapter concludes with technical and non-technical methods to realize Trustworthy AI. "Technical" here doesn't mean examples of code and algorithms, but once again suggestions with the added difference that they look into the methodologies that should be employed for building such trust.

As such, the lifecycle of building trustworthy AI should involve: 

"white list” rules (behaviors or states) that the system should always follow, and “black list” restrictions on behaviors or states that the system should never transgress".

Also there are methods to ensure value-by-design, methods that should allow the AI to explain itself, methods for testing and validating and methods for quality assessing.

The "non-technical" methods include Regulation; Codes of conduct; Standardization; Certification; Accountability via governance frameworks; Education and Awareness to foster an ethical mind-set; Stakeholder participation and Social dialogue; Diversity; and Inclusive design teams.

Chapter III: Assessing Trustworthy AI

This chapter revolves around a checklist prepared for stakeholders who'd like to implemented Trustworthy AI in their organizations or products. In every modern company this list will have to be used in relation to the role of its departments and employees .

As such, the Management/Board:

would discuss and evaluate the AI system's development, deployment or procurement, serving as an escalation board for evaluating all AI innovations and uses, when critical concerns are detected.

whereas the Compliance/Legal/Corporate department:

"would use [the list] to meet the technological or regulatory changes".

Quality Assurance would:

"ensure and check the results of the assessment list and take action to escalate issues arising"

while Developers and project managers would:

"include the assessment list in their daily work and document the results and outcomes of the assessment".

 

This is the kind of list that could be used as the entry barrier for the private sector to able to seal contracts with the public sector; "have you checked everything in the list? if yes, there's your contract".

The guidelines conclude with Examples of Opportunities where AI can be put to innovative use as in Climate action and sustainable infrastructure, Health and well-being, Quality education and digital transformation.

I would also add the following to this list, extracted from the "How Will AI Transform Life By 2030? Initial Report":

Transportation
It's a sector that will be heavily affected by automation through self-driving vehicles.As autonomous vehicles become better drivers than people, city-dwellers will own fewer cars, live further from work, and spend time differently, leading to an entirely new urban organization.

Home/Service Robots
Over the next fifteen years, coincident advances in mechanical and AI technologies promise to increase the safe and reliable use and utility of home robots in a typical North American city.Special purpose robots will deliver packages, clean offices, and enhance security.

Low resource communities
Poor communities, often underrated and left on their doings without the necessary attention, are expected to find hope in the presence of AI : Under the banner of data science for social good, AI has been used to create predictive models to help government agencies more effectively use their limited budgets to address problems such as lead poisoning. Similarly, the Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS) uses predictive models to identify pregnant women at risk for adverse birth outcomes in order to maximize the impact of prenatal care.

Various others would include mobile devices that shut off all communication when they sense that their owners needs some rest, intelligent agents that start a conversation with you when they sense the loneliness in the sound of your voice or in reading your facial expressions, self driving cars that mobilize disabled people or make the roads safe again, and more.

The document does also include the flip side of the coin with examples of Critical Concerns arising of the use of AI, such as in Identifying and tracking individuals, Covert AI systems (impersonating humans), AI enabled citizen scoring in violation of fundamental rights and, of course, Lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS) which we've already explored in "Autonomous Robot Weaponry - The Debate".

To sum up the guidelines, Chapter I was about the ethical principles and rights that should be build into AI, Chapter II laid forward the seven key requirements in order to realize an AI that is Trustworthy, while Chapter III went through the non-exhaustive assessment list necessary for organizations to implement AI in their organization and included a few examples of beneficial opportunities as well as critical concerns.

Wrapping up, the guidelines can be considered a good attempt for the EU to catch up with the coming revolution. As with every technology, there's bad use and good use, and the guidelines try to foster the correct use in every stakeholder.

Scientists and policy makers can give answers to some of the questions laid forward by the report, but to others they cannot, hence it increasingly seems that the decisions will be based on a case by case approach of trial and error.

Ethics aside, there's still the question of how the future workplace is going to be shaped by the use of AI, see "Do AI, Automation and the No-Code Movement Threaten Our Jobs?"

The question that should be addressed asap, has to be whether everyone will be positively and equally affected by the coming revolution. Answer that and the task is almost done.

 

More Information

Ethics Guidelines For Trustworthy AI 

Related Articles

TCAV Explains How AI Reaches A Decision

How Will AI Transform Life By 2030? Initial Report

Achieving Autonomous AI Is Closer Than We Think

Artificial Intelligence For Better Or Worse?

Atlas Robot - The Next Generation

Autonomous Robot Weaponry - The Debate

36 Human-Competitive Results Produced by Genetic Programming

 

To be informed about new articles on I Programmer, sign up for our weekly newsletter, subscribe to the RSS feed and follow us on, Twitter, Facebook or Linkedin.

 

Banner


Jacob Ziv Awarded IEEE Medal of Honor For Data Compression
18/01/2021

This year's IEEE Medal of Honor has been awarded to Jacob Ziv, who, with  Abraham Lempel, created two lossless compression methods (LZ-77 and LZ-78) which are the basis of a wide range  [ ... ]



Do You Love Me? Boston Dynamics Robots Show How Good They Are
30/12/2020

 ... at dancing. But don't be put off by this frivolous description. This is not an entirely frivolous display. If there is one robot video you watch this year make it this one.


More News

 

square

 



 

Comments




or email your comment to: comments@i-programmer.info



Last Updated ( Monday, 22 April 2019 )