人工智能伦理准则的探索性定性分析

A. S. Franzke
{"title":"人工智能伦理准则的探索性定性分析","authors":"A. S. Franzke","doi":"10.1108/jices-12-2020-0125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nAs Big Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) proliferate, calls have emerged for ethical reflection. Ethics guidelines have played a central role in this respect. While quantitative research on the ethics guidelines of AI/Big Data has been undertaken, there has been a dearth of systematic qualitative analyses of these documents.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nAiming to address this research gap, this paper analyses 70 international ethics guidelines documents from academia, NGOs and the corporate realm, published between 2017 and 2020.\n\n\nFindings\nThe article presents four key findings: existing ethics guidelines (1) promote a broad spectrum of values; (2) focus principally on AI, followed by (Big) Data and algorithms; (3) do not adequately define the term “ethics” and related terms; and (4) have most frequent recourse to the values of “transparency,” “privacy,” and “security.” Based on these findings, the article argues that the guidelines corpus exhibits discernible utilitarian tendencies; guidelines would benefit from greater reflexivity with respect to their ethical framework; and virtue ethical approaches have a valuable contribution to make to the process of guidelines development.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe paper provides qualitative insights into the ethical discourse surrounding AI guidelines, as well as a concise overview of different types of operative translations of theoretical ethical concepts vis-à-vis the sphere of AI. These may prove beneficial for (applied) ethicists, developers and regulators who understand these guidelines as policy.\n","PeriodicalId":156416,"journal":{"name":"J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc.","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An exploratory qualitative analysis of AI ethics guidelines\",\"authors\":\"A. S. Franzke\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jices-12-2020-0125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nAs Big Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) proliferate, calls have emerged for ethical reflection. Ethics guidelines have played a central role in this respect. While quantitative research on the ethics guidelines of AI/Big Data has been undertaken, there has been a dearth of systematic qualitative analyses of these documents.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nAiming to address this research gap, this paper analyses 70 international ethics guidelines documents from academia, NGOs and the corporate realm, published between 2017 and 2020.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe article presents four key findings: existing ethics guidelines (1) promote a broad spectrum of values; (2) focus principally on AI, followed by (Big) Data and algorithms; (3) do not adequately define the term “ethics” and related terms; and (4) have most frequent recourse to the values of “transparency,” “privacy,” and “security.” Based on these findings, the article argues that the guidelines corpus exhibits discernible utilitarian tendencies; guidelines would benefit from greater reflexivity with respect to their ethical framework; and virtue ethical approaches have a valuable contribution to make to the process of guidelines development.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe paper provides qualitative insights into the ethical discourse surrounding AI guidelines, as well as a concise overview of different types of operative translations of theoretical ethical concepts vis-à-vis the sphere of AI. These may prove beneficial for (applied) ethicists, developers and regulators who understand these guidelines as policy.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":156416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc.\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jices-12-2020-0125\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jices-12-2020-0125","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

随着大数据和人工智能(AI)的激增,人们开始呼吁进行伦理反思。道德准则在这方面发挥了核心作用。虽然对人工智能/大数据伦理准则进行了定量研究,但对这些文件缺乏系统的定性分析。为了解决这一研究缺口,本文分析了2017年至2020年间发表的70份来自学术界、非政府组织和企业领域的国际伦理准则文件。本文提出了四个主要发现:现有的道德准则(1)促进了广泛的价值观;(2)以人工智能为主,其次是(大)数据和算法;(三)对“道德”及相关术语定义不充分的;(4)最频繁地求助于“透明度”、“隐私”和“安全”的价值观。在此基础上,本文认为指导语料库表现出明显的功利主义倾向;准则将受益于其道德框架的更大反身性;美德伦理方法对指导方针的制定过程有着重要的贡献。原创性/价值本文提供了围绕人工智能指南的伦理话语的定性见解,以及对-à-vis人工智能领域中理论伦理概念的不同类型操作翻译的简要概述。对于那些将这些指导方针理解为政策的(应用)伦理学家、开发者和监管者来说,这可能是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An exploratory qualitative analysis of AI ethics guidelines
Purpose As Big Data and Artificial Intelligence (AI) proliferate, calls have emerged for ethical reflection. Ethics guidelines have played a central role in this respect. While quantitative research on the ethics guidelines of AI/Big Data has been undertaken, there has been a dearth of systematic qualitative analyses of these documents. Design/methodology/approach Aiming to address this research gap, this paper analyses 70 international ethics guidelines documents from academia, NGOs and the corporate realm, published between 2017 and 2020. Findings The article presents four key findings: existing ethics guidelines (1) promote a broad spectrum of values; (2) focus principally on AI, followed by (Big) Data and algorithms; (3) do not adequately define the term “ethics” and related terms; and (4) have most frequent recourse to the values of “transparency,” “privacy,” and “security.” Based on these findings, the article argues that the guidelines corpus exhibits discernible utilitarian tendencies; guidelines would benefit from greater reflexivity with respect to their ethical framework; and virtue ethical approaches have a valuable contribution to make to the process of guidelines development. Originality/value The paper provides qualitative insights into the ethical discourse surrounding AI guidelines, as well as a concise overview of different types of operative translations of theoretical ethical concepts vis-à-vis the sphere of AI. These may prove beneficial for (applied) ethicists, developers and regulators who understand these guidelines as policy.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信