人工智能安全性和一致性背景下的人类偏见和补救措施

Zoé Roy-Stang, Jim Davies
{"title":"人工智能安全性和一致性背景下的人类偏见和补救措施","authors":"Zoé Roy-Stang,&nbsp;Jim Davies","doi":"10.1007/s43681-025-00698-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Errors in judgment can undermine artificial intelligence (AI) safety and alignment efforts, leading to potentially catastrophic consequences. Attitudes towards AI range from total support to total opposition, and there is little agreement on how to approach the issues. We discuss how relevant cognitive biases could affect the general public’s perception of AI developments and risks associated with advanced AI. We focus on how biases could affect decision-making in key contexts of AI development, safety, and governance. We review remedies that could reduce or eliminate these biases to improve resource allocation, prioritization, and planning. We conclude with a summary list of ‘information consumer remedies’ which can be applied at the individual level and ‘information system remedies’ which can be incorporated into decision-making structures, including decision support systems, to improve the quality of decision-making. We also provide suggestions for future research on biases and remedies that could contribute to mitigating global catastrophic risks in the context of emerging, high-risk, high-reward technologies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72137,"journal":{"name":"AI and ethics","volume":"5 5","pages":"4891 - 4913"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human biases and remedies in AI safety and alignment contexts\",\"authors\":\"Zoé Roy-Stang,&nbsp;Jim Davies\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s43681-025-00698-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Errors in judgment can undermine artificial intelligence (AI) safety and alignment efforts, leading to potentially catastrophic consequences. Attitudes towards AI range from total support to total opposition, and there is little agreement on how to approach the issues. We discuss how relevant cognitive biases could affect the general public’s perception of AI developments and risks associated with advanced AI. We focus on how biases could affect decision-making in key contexts of AI development, safety, and governance. We review remedies that could reduce or eliminate these biases to improve resource allocation, prioritization, and planning. We conclude with a summary list of ‘information consumer remedies’ which can be applied at the individual level and ‘information system remedies’ which can be incorporated into decision-making structures, including decision support systems, to improve the quality of decision-making. We also provide suggestions for future research on biases and remedies that could contribute to mitigating global catastrophic risks in the context of emerging, high-risk, high-reward technologies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AI and ethics\",\"volume\":\"5 5\",\"pages\":\"4891 - 4913\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AI and ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-025-00698-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI and ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-025-00698-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

判断错误可能会破坏人工智能(AI)的安全性和一致性,从而导致潜在的灾难性后果。对人工智能的态度从完全支持到完全反对,在如何处理这些问题上几乎没有达成一致。我们讨论了相关的认知偏见如何影响公众对人工智能发展的看法以及与先进人工智能相关的风险。我们关注的是,在人工智能开发、安全和治理的关键背景下,偏见如何影响决策。我们审查可以减少或消除这些偏差的补救措施,以改善资源分配、优先级和计划。最后,我们总结了可以在个人层面应用的“信息消费者补救措施”和可以纳入决策结构(包括决策支持系统)以提高决策质量的“信息系统补救措施”。我们还为未来的偏见研究和补救措施提供了建议,这些建议可能有助于减轻新兴、高风险、高回报技术背景下的全球灾难性风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Human biases and remedies in AI safety and alignment contexts

Errors in judgment can undermine artificial intelligence (AI) safety and alignment efforts, leading to potentially catastrophic consequences. Attitudes towards AI range from total support to total opposition, and there is little agreement on how to approach the issues. We discuss how relevant cognitive biases could affect the general public’s perception of AI developments and risks associated with advanced AI. We focus on how biases could affect decision-making in key contexts of AI development, safety, and governance. We review remedies that could reduce or eliminate these biases to improve resource allocation, prioritization, and planning. We conclude with a summary list of ‘information consumer remedies’ which can be applied at the individual level and ‘information system remedies’ which can be incorporated into decision-making structures, including decision support systems, to improve the quality of decision-making. We also provide suggestions for future research on biases and remedies that could contribute to mitigating global catastrophic risks in the context of emerging, high-risk, high-reward technologies.

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