面向公众利益的人工智能发展:从抽象陷阱到社会技术风险

McKane Andrus, Sarah Dean, T. Gilbert, Nathan Lambert, T. Zick
{"title":"面向公众利益的人工智能发展:从抽象陷阱到社会技术风险","authors":"McKane Andrus, Sarah Dean, T. Gilbert, Nathan Lambert, T. Zick","doi":"10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite interest in communicating ethical problems and social contexts within the undergraduate curriculum to advance Public Interest Technology (PIT) goals, interventions at the graduate level remain largely unexplored. This may be due to the conflicting ways through which distinct Artificial Intelligence (AI) research tracks conceive of their interface with social contexts. In this paper we track the historical emergence of sociotechnical inquiry in three distinct subfields of AI research: AI Safety, Fair Machine Learning (Fair ML) and Human-Inthe-Loop (HIL) Autonomy. We show that for each subfield, perceptions of PIT stem from the particular dangers faced by past integration of technical systems within a normative social order. We further interrogate how these histories dictate the response of each subfield to conceptual traps, as defined in the Science and Technology Studies literature. Finally, through a comparative analysis of these currently siloed fields, we present a roadmap for a unified approach to sociotechnical graduate pedogogy in AI.","PeriodicalId":196560,"journal":{"name":"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"AI Development for the Public Interest: From Abstraction Traps to Sociotechnical Risks\",\"authors\":\"McKane Andrus, Sarah Dean, T. Gilbert, Nathan Lambert, T. Zick\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite interest in communicating ethical problems and social contexts within the undergraduate curriculum to advance Public Interest Technology (PIT) goals, interventions at the graduate level remain largely unexplored. This may be due to the conflicting ways through which distinct Artificial Intelligence (AI) research tracks conceive of their interface with social contexts. In this paper we track the historical emergence of sociotechnical inquiry in three distinct subfields of AI research: AI Safety, Fair Machine Learning (Fair ML) and Human-Inthe-Loop (HIL) Autonomy. We show that for each subfield, perceptions of PIT stem from the particular dangers faced by past integration of technical systems within a normative social order. We further interrogate how these histories dictate the response of each subfield to conceptual traps, as defined in the Science and Technology Studies literature. Finally, through a comparative analysis of these currently siloed fields, we present a roadmap for a unified approach to sociotechnical graduate pedogogy in AI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":196560,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

尽管有兴趣在本科课程中沟通伦理问题和社会背景,以推进公共利益技术(PIT)的目标,但研究生水平的干预措施在很大程度上仍未被探索。这可能是由于不同的人工智能(AI)研究轨迹设想其与社会背景的接口时所采用的相互冲突的方式。在本文中,我们跟踪了人工智能研究的三个不同子领域中社会技术调查的历史出现:人工智能安全,公平机器学习(公平ML)和人类在环(HIL)自治。我们表明,对于每个子领域,对PIT的看法源于过去在规范的社会秩序中整合技术系统所面临的特殊危险。我们进一步探究这些历史如何决定每个子领域对科学和技术研究文献中定义的概念陷阱的反应。最后,通过对这些目前孤立的领域的比较分析,我们提出了人工智能社会技术研究生教育学统一方法的路线图。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
AI Development for the Public Interest: From Abstraction Traps to Sociotechnical Risks
Despite interest in communicating ethical problems and social contexts within the undergraduate curriculum to advance Public Interest Technology (PIT) goals, interventions at the graduate level remain largely unexplored. This may be due to the conflicting ways through which distinct Artificial Intelligence (AI) research tracks conceive of their interface with social contexts. In this paper we track the historical emergence of sociotechnical inquiry in three distinct subfields of AI research: AI Safety, Fair Machine Learning (Fair ML) and Human-Inthe-Loop (HIL) Autonomy. We show that for each subfield, perceptions of PIT stem from the particular dangers faced by past integration of technical systems within a normative social order. We further interrogate how these histories dictate the response of each subfield to conceptual traps, as defined in the Science and Technology Studies literature. Finally, through a comparative analysis of these currently siloed fields, we present a roadmap for a unified approach to sociotechnical graduate pedogogy in AI.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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