research-article

A Study on the Modeling of Major Factors for the Principles of AI Ethics

Authors:

Hun Yeong KwonAuthors Info & Claims

dg.o '21: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research

Pages 208 - 218

https://doi.org/10.1145/3463677.3463733

Published: 09 June 2021 Publication History

Abstract

The fourth industrial revolution, centered on artificial intelligence (AI), signals a significant transformation in human society. For this social transformation to ultimately be for humankind's prosperity and happiness, serious consideration of AI ethics is needed. As a result, many countries have begun to establish AI ethics principles, and the international community is pushing for standardization on AI ethics principles. This study aims to derive general factors of ethical principles that should be considered to establish and standardize AI ethics principles. To this end, we present a "general AI ethics principles model," including 12 major factors, based on the recently published AI ethics principles in 15 countries. Furthermore, the major factors for AI ethics principles that we derived through this study ultimately confirmed that AI should be useful to all humans and is oriented toward the value of building a "Trustworthy" AI society. Based on these fundamental ideologies, we confirmed that each factor interconnects with each other. It is hoped that the AI ethics principles model that reflects this will be referred to national and international communities that have yet to develop Principles of AI Ethics. However, Factors for AI ethics principles should be constructed following the principles' intent and goal orientation, ensuring its feasibility, rather than merely duplicating the principles model.

References

[1]

Schwab Klaus. 2017. The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Crown Publishing Group, New York, NY, USA.

[2]

Cedric Villani. 2018. For a Meaningful Artificial Intelligence; Towards a French and European Strategy. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.aiforhumanity.fr/pdfs/MissionVillani_Report_ENG-VF.pdf

[3]

World Economic Forum. 2017. Global Risk Report 2017. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://reports.weforum.org/global-risks-2017/part-3-emerging-technologies/3-2-assessing-the-risk-of-artificial-intelligence/

[4]

David Leslie. 2019. Understanding artificial intelligence ethics and safety: A guide for the responsible design and implementation of AI systems in the public sector. The Alan Turing Institute. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3240529

[5]

AlgorithmWatch. AI Ethics Guidelines Global Inventory. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://inventory.algorithmwatch.org/

[6]

Future Life Institute. 2017. ASILOMAR AI PRINCIPLES. Asilomar Conference on Beneficial AI. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://futureoflife. org/aiprinciples/?cn-reloaded=1

[7]

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. 2017. The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems:Ethically Aligned Design version2: A Vision for Prioritizing Human Well-being with Autonomous and with Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. New York, NY, USA. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-standards/standards/web/documents/other/ead_v2.pdf

[8]

Hiroshi Nakagawa. 2020. Focuses of Recent AI Ethics Guidelines and Personal AI Agent. Journal of Information and Communications Policy Vol.3, No.2, 1-24.

[9]

Yungkwon Min. 2020. “International AI Ethics Standard, a long way off...The norms of Korea, the U.S., China, and Japan are all different”. Seoul Economy, Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.sedaily.com/NewsVIew/1YXTNHEJQW

[10]

Dawson D and Schleiger E, Horton J, McLaughlin J, Robinson C, Quezada G, Scowcroft J, and Hajkowicz S. 2019. Artificial Intelligence: Australia's Ethics Framework. Data61 CSIRO, Australia. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://consult.industry.gov.au/strategic-policy/artificial-intelligence-ethics-framework/supporting_documents/ArtificialIntelligenceethicsframeworkdiscussionpaper.pdf

[11]

Government of Canada. 2018. Responsible Artificial Intelligence in the Government of Canada (Version2.0). Digital Disruption White Paper Series. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Sn-qBZUXEUG4dVk909eSg5qvfbpNlRhzIefWPtBwbxY/edit#heading=h.uzvrcd68gx2s

[12]

Lorand Laskai, Graham Webster. 2019. Translation: Chinese Expert Group Offers 'Governance Principles' for 'Responsible AI' - China's New Generation AI Governance Expert Committee is Linked to the Ministry of Science and Technology. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.newamerica.org/cybersecurity-initiative/digichina/blog/translation-chinese-expert-group-offers-governance-principles-responsible-ai/

[13]

Data Ethics Commission. 2019. Opinion of the Data Ethics Commission. Data Ethics Commission of the Federal Government Federal Ministry of the Interior, Berlin, Germany. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Themen/Fokusthemen/Gutachten_DEK_EN.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2

[14]

Arnab Kumar, Punit Shukla, Aalekh Sharan, and Tanay Mahindru. 2018. National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence. NITI Aayog Discussion Paper. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://niti.gov.in/writereaddata/files/document_publication/NationalStrategy-for-AI-Discussion-Paper.pdf

[15]

Agency for Digital Italy. 2018. Artificial Intelligence at the service of the citizen. The White Paper, edited by the AI Task Force promoted by the Agency for Digital Italy. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://libro-bianco-ia.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

[16]

Decision of the Joint Innovation Strategy Promotion Council. 2019. Social Principles of Human-Centric AI. Japanese Cabinet Secretariat. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.cas.go.jp/jp/seisaku/jinkouchinou/

[17]

Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier. 2018. Artificial Intelligence: opportunities, risks and recommendations for the financial sector. Luxembourg. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.cssf.lu/wp-content/uploads/files/Publications/Rapports_ponctuels/CSSF_White_Paper_Artificial_Intelligence_201218.pdf

[18]

New Zealand Government. 2018. Principles for the safe and effective use of data and analytics. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.privacy.org.nz/assets/Uploads/Principles-for-the-safe-and-effective-use-of-data-and-analytics-guidance3.pdf

[19]

Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) and Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC). 2020. A Proposed Model Artificial Intelligence Governance Framework (second edition). Singapore Digital (SG:D). Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.pdpc.gov.sg/-/media/files/pdpc/pdf-files/resource-for-organisation/ai/sgmodelaigovframework2.pdf

[20]

Korean government. 2020. human-centered Artificial Intelligence ethical principles. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.korea.kr/news/pressReleaseView.do?newsId=156428773

[21]

Aisha Bint Butti Bin Bishr. 2019. AI ETHICS PRINCIPLES & GUIDELINES. SMART DUBAI. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.smartdubai.ae/docs/default-source/ai-principles-resources/ai-ethics.pdf?sfvrsn=d4184f8d_6

[22]

Government Digital Service and Office for Artificial Intelligence. 2019. A guide to using artificial intelligence in the public sector - Using artificial intelligence ethically and safely. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.gov.uk/guidance/understanding-artificial-intelligence-ethics-and-safety

[23]

Office of the Director of National Intelligence. 2020. Principles of Artificial Intelligence Ethics for the Intelligence Community. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://www.dni.gov/index.php/features/2763-principles-of-artificial-intelligence-ethics-for-the-intelligence-community

[24]

World Economic Forum. 2020. The Global Risks Report 2020. World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Global_Risk_Report_2020.pdf

[25]

Nicholas Diakopoulos, Michael Koliska. 2016. Algorithmic transparency in the news media. Digital Journalism, Vol.5, Issue 7, 809–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1208053

[26]

Ke Yang, Julia Stoyanovich. 2017. Measuring fairness in ranked outputs. Proceedings of the 29th international conference on scientific and statistical database management, June 2017, Article No.22, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3085504.3085526

Digital Library

[27]

David Beer. 2017. The social power of algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, vol.20, Issue 1, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147

[28]

Mike Ananny, Kate Crawford. 2016. Seeing without knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability. New Media & Society, Vol.20, Issue 3, 973–989. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816676645

[29]

Tae Ho Lee, Lois A. Boynton. 2017. Conceptualizing transparency: Propositions for the integration of situational factors and stakeholders’ perspectives. Public Relations Inquiry, Vol. 6, Issue 3, 233-251. https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X17694937

[30]

Grzegorz Mazurek, Karolina Małagocka. 2019. Perception of privacy and data protection in the context of the development of artificial intelligence. Journal of Management Analytics, Vol.6, Issue 4: Artificial intelligence and management analytics, 344-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/23270012.2019.1671243

[31]

Shari Trewin. 2018. AI Fairness for People with Disabilities: Point of View. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.10670?context=cs.AI

[32]

Ajay Agrawal, Joshua Gans, and Avi Goldfarb. 2019. Economic Policy for Artificial Intelligence. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), Innovation Policy and the Economy, Vol.19, 139-159. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24690

[33]

Ehsan Toreini, Mhairi Aitken, Kovila Coopamootoo, Karen Elliott, Carlos Gonzalez Zelaya, Aad Van Moorsel. 2020. The relationship between trust in AI and trustworthy machine learning technologies. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, January 2020, 272–283. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372834

Digital Library

[34]

Takao Nita. 2020. About human-centered AI social principles. Retrieved January 15, 2021 from http://www.juce.jp/LINK/journal/2001/02_05.html

[35]

Fumio Shimpo. 2020. Do AI principles work?, Information and Communication Policy Research, Vol.3, No.2, 53-70.

Cited By

Kirshner SLawson J(2024)Preventing Promotion-Focused Goals: The Impact of Regulatory Focus on Responsible AIComputers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100112(100112)Online publication date: Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100112
Hauptman ASchelble BDuan WFlathmann CMcNeese N(2024)Understanding the influence of AI autonomy on AI explainability levels in human-AI teams using a mixed methods approachCognition, Technology & Work10.1007/s10111-024-00765-726:3(435-455)Online publication date: 18-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-024-00765-7
Capel TBrereton M(2023)What is Human-Centered about Human-Centered AI? A Map of the Research LandscapeProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3580959(1-23)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3580959
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

The Role and Limits of Principles in AI Ethics: Towards a Focus on Tensions
AIES '19: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

The last few years have seen a proliferation of principles for AI ethics. There is substantial overlap between different sets of principles, with widespread agreement that AI should be used for the common good, should not be used to harm people or ...
AI ethics: from principles to practice
Abstract
Much of the current work on AI ethics has lost its connection to the real-world impact by making AI ethics operable. There exist significant limitations of hyper-focusing on the identification of abstract ethical principles, lacking effective ...
Dewey’s Ethics of Moral Principles and Deliberation: Extending IEEE’s Ethics Initiative for Adaptive Instructional Systems
Adaptive Instructional Systems
Abstract
This paper proposes an expansion of the classical ethical foundations as laid out by the IEEE’s Global Initiative on the Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems that are of particular relevance for developers and interested parties concerned ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

dg.o '21: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research

June 2021

600 pages

ISBN:9781450384926

DOI:10.1145/3463677

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 09 June 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

DG.O'21

DG.O'21: The 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research

June 9 - 11, 2021

NE, Omaha, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 150 of 271 submissions, 55%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
226
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)69
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3

Reflects downloads up to 30 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Kirshner SLawson J(2024)Preventing Promotion-Focused Goals: The Impact of Regulatory Focus on Responsible AIComputers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100112(100112)Online publication date: Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100112
Hauptman ASchelble BDuan WFlathmann CMcNeese N(2024)Understanding the influence of AI autonomy on AI explainability levels in human-AI teams using a mixed methods approachCognition, Technology & Work10.1007/s10111-024-00765-726:3(435-455)Online publication date: 18-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-024-00765-7
Capel TBrereton M(2023)What is Human-Centered about Human-Centered AI? A Map of the Research LandscapeProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3580959(1-23)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3580959
Lim JSeo JChoi JKwon H(2023)A Study on the Role of Higher Education and Human Resources Development for Data Driven AI SocietyBig Data, Cloud Computing, and Data Science Engineering10.1007/978-3-031-19608-9_9(107-118)Online publication date: 9-Feb-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19608-9_9
Miller G(2022)Artificial Intelligence Project Success Factors—Beyond the Ethical PrinciplesInformation Technology for Management: Business and Social Issues10.1007/978-3-030-98997-2_4(65-96)Online publication date: 22-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98997-2_4

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents