Abstract

As the range of potential uses for Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular machine learning (ML), has increased, so has awareness of the associated ethical issues. This increased awareness has led to the realisation that existing legislation and regulation provides insufficient protection to individuals, groups, society, and the environment from AI harms. In response to this realisation, there has been a proliferation of principle-based ethics codes, guidelines and frameworks. However, it has become increasingly clear that a significant gap exists between the theory of AI ethics principles and the practical design of AI systems. In previous work, we analysed whether it is possible to close this gap between the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of AI ethics through the use of tools and methods designed to help AI developers, engineers, and designers translate principles into practice. We concluded that this method of closure is currently ineffective as almost all existing translational tools and methods are either too flexible (and thus vulnerable to ethics washing) or too strict (unresponsive to context). This raised the question: if, even with technical guidance, AI ethics is challenging to embed in the process of algorithmic design, is the entire pro-ethical design endeavour rendered futile? And, if no, then how can AI ethics be made useful for AI practitioners? This is the question we seek to address here by exploring why principles and technical translational tools are still needed even if they are limited, and how these limitations can be potentially overcome by providing theoretical grounding of a concept that has been termed ‘Ethics as a Service.’

Highlights

  • As the range of potential uses for Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular machine learning (ML), has increased, so has awareness of the ethical issues posed by the design, development, deployment and use of AI systems

  • We found that numerous tools and methodologies exist to help AI practitioners translate between the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of AI ethics, we found that the vast majority

  • This overall conclusion forces the AI ethics community to face the difficult question: if, even with technical guidance (such as that provided in IEEE’s Ethically Aligned Design standards (The IEEE Global Intiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems, 2019)) AI ethics is challenging to embed in the process of algorithmic Design, is the entire pro-ethical design (Floridi, 2019a) endeavour rendered futile? And, if no, how can AI ethics be made useful for AI practitioners?

Read more

Summary

Introduction

As the range of potential uses for Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular machine learning (ML), has increased, so has awareness of the ethical issues posed by the design, development, deployment and use of AI systems ( collapsed into ‘Design’). Of these tools are severely limited in terms of usability The development of these translational tools and methods may have been useful for enabling individual groups of researchers/companies to raise internal awareness of AI ethics and to examine different interpretations of ethical principles. If the same something is too strict, and is implemented in a top-down and non-flexible way, it fails to account for the fact that sometimes there is no social consensus about what is the ‘right’ way to interpret or apply ethics or ethical principles—this instead depends on how aggregate views of society are collected and which voices are included (Allen et al, 2000; Baum, 2017) This overall conclusion (too flexible or strict) forces the AI ethics community to face the difficult question: if, even with technical guidance (such as that provided in IEEE’s Ethically Aligned Design standards (The IEEE Global Intiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems, 2019)) AI ethics is challenging to embed in the process of algorithmic Design, is the entire pro-ethical design (Floridi, 2019a) endeavour rendered futile? The final section concludes the article, highlighting where further research is needed

Lowering the Level of Abstraction
Limits of Principlism and Translational Tools
Box 1: The Digital Catapult AI Ethics Framework
A Series of Compromises
Finding a Compromise Between Too Flexible and Too Strict
Finding a Compromise Between Devolved and Centralised Responsibility
Outlining Ethics as a Service
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call