The Role and Limits of Principles in AI Ethics: Towards a Focus on Tensions

Jess Whittlestone, Rune Nyrup, A. Alexandrova, S. Cave
{"title":"The Role and Limits of Principles in AI Ethics: Towards a Focus on Tensions","authors":"Jess Whittlestone, Rune Nyrup, A. Alexandrova, S. Cave","doi":"10.1145/3306618.3314289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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 undermine their rights, and should respect widely held values such as fairness, privacy, and autonomy. While articulating and agreeing on principles is important, it is only a starting point. Drawing on comparisons with the field of bioethics, we highlight some of the limitations of principles: in particular, they are often too broad and high-level to guide ethics in practice. We suggest that an important next step for the field of AI ethics is to focus on exploring the tensions that inevitably arise as we try to implement principles in practice. By explicitly recognising these tensions we can begin to make decisions about how they should be resolved in specific cases, and develop frameworks and guidelines for AI ethics that are rigorous and practically relevant. We discuss some different specific ways that tensions arise in AI ethics, and what processes might be needed to resolve them.","PeriodicalId":418125,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"158","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314289","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 158

Abstract

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 undermine their rights, and should respect widely held values such as fairness, privacy, and autonomy. While articulating and agreeing on principles is important, it is only a starting point. Drawing on comparisons with the field of bioethics, we highlight some of the limitations of principles: in particular, they are often too broad and high-level to guide ethics in practice. We suggest that an important next step for the field of AI ethics is to focus on exploring the tensions that inevitably arise as we try to implement principles in practice. By explicitly recognising these tensions we can begin to make decisions about how they should be resolved in specific cases, and develop frameworks and guidelines for AI ethics that are rigorous and practically relevant. We discuss some different specific ways that tensions arise in AI ethics, and what processes might be needed to resolve them.
原则在人工智能伦理中的作用和限制:关注紧张关系
过去几年,人工智能伦理原则激增。不同的原则之间有很大的重叠,人们普遍认为人工智能应该用于公共利益,不应该用来伤害人们或破坏他们的权利,应该尊重公平、隐私和自治等广泛持有的价值观。虽然阐明并就原则达成一致很重要,但这只是一个起点。通过与生物伦理学领域的比较,我们强调了原则的一些局限性:特别是,它们往往过于宽泛和高层次,无法指导实践中的伦理。我们建议,人工智能伦理领域的重要下一步是专注于探索在实践中实施原则时不可避免地出现的紧张关系。通过明确认识到这些紧张关系,我们可以开始决定如何在具体情况下解决这些问题,并制定严格且与实际相关的人工智能伦理框架和指导方针。我们讨论了人工智能伦理中出现紧张局势的一些不同具体方式,以及可能需要哪些过程来解决它们。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信