The Journey to Trustworthy AI- Part 1: Pursuit of Pragmatic Frameworks

2403.15457

YC

0

Reddit

0

Published 4/9/2024 by Mohamad M Nasr-Azadani, Jean-Luc Chatelain
The Journey to Trustworthy AI- Part 1: Pursuit of Pragmatic Frameworks

Abstract

This paper reviews Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (TAI) and its various definitions. Considering the principles respected in any society, TAI is often characterized by a few attributes, some of which have led to confusion in regulatory or engineering contexts. We argue against using terms such as Responsible or Ethical AI as substitutes for TAI. And to help clarify any confusion, we suggest leaving them behind. Given the subjectivity and complexity inherent in TAI, developing a universal framework is deemed infeasible. Instead, we advocate for approaches centered on addressing key attributes and properties such as fairness, bias, risk, security, explainability, and reliability. We examine the ongoing regulatory landscape, with a focus on initiatives in the EU, China, and the USA. We recognize that differences in AI regulations based on geopolitical and geographical reasons pose an additional challenge for multinational companies. We identify risk as a core factor in AI regulation and TAI. For example, as outlined in the EU-AI Act, organizations must gauge the risk level of their AI products to act accordingly (or risk hefty fines). We compare modalities of TAI implementation and how multiple cross-functional teams are engaged in the overall process. Thus, a brute force approach for enacting TAI renders its efficiency and agility, moot. To address this, we introduce our framework Set-Formalize-Measure-Act (SFMA). Our solution highlights the importance of transforming TAI-aware metrics, drivers of TAI, stakeholders, and business/legal requirements into actual benchmarks or tests. Finally, over-regulation driven by panic of powerful AI models can, in fact, harm TAI too. Based on GitHub user-activity data, in 2023, AI open-source projects rose to top projects by contributor account. Enabling innovation in TAI hinges on the independent contributions of the open-source community.

Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:

Overview

  • This paper examines the concept of "trustworthy AI" and the challenges in developing a common definition and pragmatic frameworks for it.
  • It explores the differences between viewing trustworthy AI as an attribute versus a property, and the implications for how it should be approached.
  • The paper also discusses the need for more collaboration between researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to establish a shared understanding and practical approaches to trustworthy AI.

Plain English Explanation

The paper looks at the topic of "trustworthy AI" - what it means and how to actually achieve it in practice. There's a lot of debate around what trustworthy AI really is, with some seeing it as a quality or attribute of an AI system, while others view it more as an inherent property.

The key challenge is that there isn't a clear, agreed-upon definition of trustworthy AI. Different people and organizations have their own ideas of what it should entail, whether that's things like fairness, transparency, robustness, or something else. This lack of a shared understanding makes it difficult to develop practical frameworks and approaches for building trustworthy AI systems.

To address this, the paper argues that we need more collaboration between researchers, policymakers, and the teams actually developing AI. By working together, they can try to establish a common definition and practical guidelines for what trustworthy AI should look like. This would help provide a clear roadmap for organizations trying to develop AI systems that are reliable, responsible, and aligned with human values.

Technical Explanation

The paper first examines the different perspectives on what constitutes "trustworthy AI" - whether it's viewed as an attribute that can be measured and assessed, or a more inherent property of an AI system. <a href="https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/trust-ai-progress-challenges-future-directions">This debate reflects ongoing challenges</a> in the field around establishing a shared understanding and concrete frameworks for trustworthy AI.

The authors then discuss the need for more cross-disciplinary collaboration to address this issue. <a href="https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/collaborative-human-ai-trust-chai-t-process">They argue that researchers, policymakers, and AI developers</a> need to work together to define the key elements of trustworthy AI and develop practical guidelines for implementation. <a href="https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/now-later-lasting-ten-priorities-ai-research">This aligns with broader calls for a more integrated, multi-stakeholder approach</a> to responsible AI development and deployment.

The paper also touches on related concepts like <a href="https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/designing-complementarity-conceptual-framework-to-go-beyond">the need for complementarity between human and AI capabilities</a>, and the importance of <a href="https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/responsible-reporting-frontier-ai-development">responsible reporting and communication around AI progress and risks</a>. These all contribute to the overall challenge of establishing trust and accountability in the use of AI technologies.

Critical Analysis

The paper rightly identifies the lack of a clear, agreed-upon definition of trustworthy AI as a major obstacle to making progress in this area. However, it doesn't provide much insight into the underlying reasons for this disconnect or specific proposals for how to bridge the gap.

While the call for more collaboration is reasonable, the paper doesn't delve into the practical challenges of getting diverse stakeholders to align on complex technical and ethical issues. Differences in priorities, incentives, and cultural perspectives can make such cross-disciplinary work quite difficult in reality.

Additionally, the paper doesn't address some of the inherent tensions and trade-offs involved in trying to make AI systems "trustworthy." There may be cases where certain trustworthy attributes, like transparency, could conflict with other desirable properties like efficiency or scalability. The paper could have explored these nuances in more depth.

Overall, the paper provides a high-level overview of the challenge, but lacks a more substantive analysis of the underlying issues and potential pathways forward. More specific research and proposals would be needed to truly advance the quest for trustworthy AI.

Conclusion

This paper highlights the crucial, yet elusive, goal of developing trustworthy AI systems. It underscores the lack of a clear, shared definition of what trustworthy AI entails, and the need for greater collaboration between researchers, policymakers, and AI developers to establish common frameworks and pragmatic approaches.

Achieving trustworthy AI is essential as these technologies become increasingly pervasive in our lives. By working together to define the key attributes and implementation strategies, the AI community can help ensure these powerful tools are deployed responsibly and in alignment with human values. However, as the paper alludes to, there are significant technical and cultural challenges that will need to be navigated along the way.

Continued research, debate, and multistakeholder cooperation will be critical to making steady progress towards trustworthy AI - a goal that is essential for realizing the full potential of these transformative technologies while mitigating potential risks and harms.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Related Papers

🔎

New!Fair by design: A sociotechnical approach to justifying the fairness of AI-enabled systems across the lifecycle

Marten H. L. Kaas, Christopher Burr, Zoe Porter, Berk Ozturk, Philippa Ryan, Michael Katell, Nuala Polo, Kalle Westerling, Ibrahim Habli

YC

0

Reddit

0

Fairness is one of the most commonly identified ethical principles in existing AI guidelines, and the development of fair AI-enabled systems is required by new and emerging AI regulation. But most approaches to addressing the fairness of AI-enabled systems are limited in scope in two significant ways: their substantive content focuses on statistical measures of fairness, and they do not emphasize the need to identify and address fairness considerations across the whole AI lifecycle. Our contribution is to present an assurance framework and tool that can enable a practical and transparent method for widening the scope of fairness considerations across the AI lifecycle and move the discussion beyond mere statistical notions of fairness to consider a richer analysis in a practical and context-dependent manner. To illustrate this approach, we first describe and then apply the framework of Trustworthy and Ethical Assurance (TEA) to an AI-enabled clinical diagnostic support system (CDSS) whose purpose is to help clinicians predict the risk of developing hypertension in patients with Type 2 diabetes, a context in which several fairness considerations arise (e.g., discrimination against patient subgroups). This is supplemented by an open-source tool and a fairness considerations map to help facilitate reasoning about the fairness of AI-enabled systems in a participatory way. In short, by using a shared framework for identifying, documenting and justifying fairness considerations, and then using this deliberative exercise to structure an assurance case, research on AI fairness becomes reusable and generalizable for others in the ethical AI community and for sharing best practices for achieving fairness and equity in digital health and healthcare in particular.

Read more

6/14/2024

🎲

Trust in AI: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions

Saleh Afroogh, Ali Akbari, Evan Malone, Mohammadali Kargar, Hananeh Alambeigi

YC

0

Reddit

0

The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in our daily life through various applications, services, and products explains the significance of trust/distrust in AI from a user perspective. AI-driven systems (as opposed to other technologies) have ubiquitously diffused in our life not only as some beneficial tools to be used by human agents but also are going to be substitutive agents on our behalf, or manipulative minds that would influence human thought, decision, and agency. Trust/distrust in AI plays the role of a regulator and could significantly control the level of this diffusion, as trust can increase, and distrust may reduce the rate of adoption of AI. Recently, varieties of studies have paid attention to the variant dimension of trust/distrust in AI, and its relevant considerations. In this systematic literature review, after conceptualization of trust in the current AI literature review, we will investigate trust in different types of human-Machine interaction, and its impact on technology acceptance in different domains. In addition to that, we propose a taxonomy of technical (i.e., safety, accuracy, robustness) and non-technical axiological (i.e., ethical, legal, and mixed) trustworthiness metrics, and some trustworthy measurements. Moreover, we examine some major trust-breakers in AI (e.g., autonomy and dignity threat), and trust makers; and propose some future directions and probable solutions for the transition to a trustworthy AI.

Read more

4/5/2024

🤖

Developing trustworthy AI applications with foundation models

Michael Mock (Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Sebastian Schmidt (Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Felix Muller (University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany, Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Rebekka Gorge (Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Anna Schmitz (Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Elena Haedecke (University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany, Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Angelika Voss (Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Dirk Hecker (Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany), Maximillian Poretschkin (Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems IAIS Sankt Augustin, Germany, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany)

YC

0

Reddit

0

The trustworthiness of AI applications has been the subject of recent research and is also addressed in the EU's recently adopted AI Regulation. The currently emerging foundation models in the field of text, speech and image processing offer completely new possibilities for developing AI applications. This whitepaper shows how the trustworthiness of an AI application developed with foundation models can be evaluated and ensured. For this purpose, the application-specific, risk-based approach for testing and ensuring the trustworthiness of AI applications, as developed in the 'AI Assessment Catalog - Guideline for Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence' by Fraunhofer IAIS, is transferred to the context of foundation models. Special consideration is given to the fact that specific risks of foundation models can have an impact on the AI application and must also be taken into account when checking trustworthiness. Chapter 1 of the white paper explains the fundamental relationship between foundation models and AI applications based on them in terms of trustworthiness. Chapter 2 provides an introduction to the technical construction of foundation models and Chapter 3 shows how AI applications can be developed based on them. Chapter 4 provides an overview of the resulting risks regarding trustworthiness. Chapter 5 shows which requirements for AI applications and foundation models are to be expected according to the draft of the European Union's AI Regulation and Chapter 6 finally shows the system and procedure for meeting trustworthiness requirements.

Read more

5/9/2024

Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systems

Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systems

David davidad Dalrymple, Joar Skalse, Yoshua Bengio, Stuart Russell, Max Tegmark, Sanjit Seshia, Steve Omohundro, Christian Szegedy, Ben Goldhaber, Nora Ammann, Alessandro Abate, Joe Halpern, Clark Barrett, Ding Zhao, Tan Zhi-Xuan, Jeannette Wing, Joshua Tenenbaum

YC

0

Reddit

0

Ensuring that AI systems reliably and robustly avoid harmful or dangerous behaviours is a crucial challenge, especially for AI systems with a high degree of autonomy and general intelligence, or systems used in safety-critical contexts. In this paper, 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. This is achieved by the interplay of three core components: a world model (which provides a mathematical description of how the AI system affects the outside world), a safety specification (which is a mathematical description of what effects are acceptable), and a verifier (which provides an auditable proof certificate that the AI satisfies the safety specification relative to the world model). 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. We also argue for the necessity of this approach to AI safety, and for the inadequacy of the main alternative approaches.

Read more

5/20/2024