public:t-709-aies-2025:aies-2025:principle_ai_ethics
This is an old revision of the document!
DCS-T-709-AIES-2025 Main
Link to Lecture Notes
Principles of AI Ethics
Main Principles of AI Ethics
- Transparency
- Justice & Fairness
- Safety
- Responsibility
- Privacy
Taken from: Jobin, et al. “The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines.” Nature Machine Intelligence 1.9 (2019)
UNESCO added principle (taken from: UNESCO. “Recommendations on the ethics of Artificial Intelligence“ UNESDOC digital library (2022))
- Proportionality
Transparency
What is it? | Understandability of decisions/ operations/ plans of systems |
Importance | Building trust, scrutinizing the issues, and minimizing harm |
Issues | - Accountability issues of black-box systems, e.g., LLMs for medicine - Safety issues: No transparency leads to no improvement, leading to less safety - Others? |
Implementation | - Knowledge representation and reasoning using explicit causal networks, decision trees, etc. - Explainability techniques (Post-hoc and real-time) - Documentation including, for example, (ANNs) open training (and test) data and model types, r (Symbolic AI) reasoning types |
Justice and Fairness
What is it? | The promotion of equality by avoiding bias and discrimination. This includes: - Equality in use/ access (e.g., open-source) - Equality in training/opportunity: No one must be excluded from AI training - Equality in AI-based judgement: Decision-making based on specific factors, gender, and race is not allowed. |
Importance | Technology must be accessible and useful to everyone. |
Issues | - Conflict of interest between technology providers and users in the competitive AI market. - Biases in the dataset and data-sensitive algorithms that use these datasets, leading to unequal impacts. |
Implementation | - Following guidelines for data collection - Reducing the reliance on data-dependent methods - Bias detection and correction algorithms. |
Safety
What is it? | Making sure systems do not cause harm to individuals (or society). |
Importance | “Do no harm” is more important than “Doing good” |
Issues | Privacy violations, physical harm, or psychological damage, for example: - Misuse of private information by companies (e.g., facial recognition) - Physical harm due to malfunctioning or improper use (e.g., accidents in autonomous cars) - Stress and social anxiety due to interaction with AI systems/ AI companion chatbots. |
Implementation | - Using testing and monitoring techniques - Anomaly detections - Safety guidelines for the creation and use of AI systems for specific domains |
Responsibility
What is it? | Accountability of actions and decisions |
Importance | The need for ethical conduct by AI developers and users |
Issues | It is usually not clear who is responsible for the mistakes of AI systems. Ai, designer or user? |
Implementation | - Ethical training regarding the use and development of AI - Promoting a culture of integrity within AI development teams - Proper documentation for the system |
Privacy
What is it? | Protection of personal data |
Importance | Protecting the rights of the individual |
Issues | It is challenging to find the balance between privacy and the need for large datasets for data-driven AI systems development |
Implementaiton | Technical methods like - Data minimization techniques, - Privacy-by-design approaches As well as - data protection regulations - Increased public awareness about the privacy rights |
Proportionality
What is it? | - AI systems must not be used beyond what is necessary to achieve a legitimate aim. - Developers and deployers should assess and prevent harms, requiring that any use of AI be appropriately scaled and carefully considered relative to its purpose |
Importance | - Helps ensure AI does more good than harm by insisting that risk is weighed and that harm prevention is central. - Protects individuals, society and rights (e.g., fairness, privacy). - Helps maintain public trust, avoids overreach (e.g., surveillance, misuse), and ensures ethical limits to what AI can do. |
Issues | - What counts as “necessary” or “legitimate aim” is often contested. - Harms can be indirect, delayed, or unseen, making assessment difficult. - Risk of mission creep: What starts as a minor system may expand beyond original scope - Sometimes proportionality conflicts with other principles like fairness, or transparency. - Asymmetric power: Actors with more power may define what is “necessary” in ways that favor themselves. |
Implementation | - Use risk assessment and harm impact assessment before, during, and after deployment. - Limit scope: Ensure capabilities are aligned with what is needed. - Define and document legitimate aims explicitly. - Ensure there is the ability to stop or scale back systems. - Build in legal or regulatory constraints to enforce limits. |
/var/www/cadia.ru.is/wiki/data/attic/public/t-709-aies-2025/aies-2025/principle_ai_ethics.1758186664.txt.gz · Last modified: 2025/09/18 09:11 by leonard