Beyond principlism: Practical strategies for ethical AI use in research practices
0
🤖
Sign in to get full access
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🤖
0
New!Beyond principlism: Practical strategies for ethical AI use in research practices
Zhicheng Lin
The rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in scientific research, particularly large language models (LLMs), has outpaced the development of ethical guidelines, leading to a Triple-Too problem: too many high-level ethical initiatives, too abstract principles lacking contextual and practical relevance, and too much focus on restrictions and risks over benefits and utilities. Existing approaches, such as principlism (reliance on abstract ethical principles), formalism (rigid application of rules), and technical solutionism (overemphasis on technological fixes), offer little practical guidance for addressing ethical challenges of AI in scientific research practices. To bridge the gap between abstract principles and day-to-day research practices, we propose a user-centered, realism-inspired approach. We outline five specific goals for ethical AI use: 1) understanding model training and output, including bias mitigation strategies; 2) respecting privacy, confidentiality, and copyright; 3) avoiding plagiarism and policy violations; 4) applying AI beneficially compared to alternatives; and 5) using AI transparently and reproducibly. For each goal, we provide actionable strategies and analyze realistic cases of misuse and corrective measures. We argue that ethical AI application requires evaluating its utility against existing alternatives rather than isolated performance metrics. Additionally, we propose documentation guidelines to enhance transparency and reproducibility in AI-assisted research. Moving forward, we emphasize the need for targeted professional development, training programs, and balanced enforcement mechanisms to promote responsible AI use while fostering innovation. By refining these ethical guidelines and adapting to emerging AI capabilities, we can accelerate scientific progress without compromising research integrity.
Read more9/18/2024
🤖
0
Crossing the principle-practice gap in AI ethics with ethical problem-solving
Nicholas Kluge Corr^ea, James William Santos, Camila Galv~ao, Marcelo Pasetti, Dieine Schiavon, Faizah Naqvi, Robayet Hossain, Nythamar De Oliveira
The past years have presented a surge in (AI) development, fueled by breakthroughs in deep learning, increased computational power, and substantial investments in the field. Given the generative capabilities of more recent AI systems, the era of large-scale AI models has transformed various domains that intersect our daily lives. However, this progress raises concerns about the balance between technological advancement, ethical considerations, safety measures, and financial interests. Moreover, using such systems in sensitive areas amplifies our general ethical awareness, prompting a reemergence of debates on governance, regulation, and human values. However, amidst this landscape, how to bridge the principle-practice gap separating ethical discourse from the technical side of AI development remains an open problem. In response to this challenge, the present work proposes a framework to help shorten this gap: ethical problem-solving (EPS). EPS is a methodology promoting responsible, human-centric, and value-oriented AI development. The framework's core resides in translating principles into practical implementations using impact assessment surveys and a differential recommendation methodology. We utilize EPS as a blueprint to propose the implementation of Ethics as a Service Platform, which is currently available as a simple demonstration. We released all framework components openly and with a permissive license, hoping the community would adopt and extend our efforts into other contexts. Available in https://github.com/Nkluge-correa/ethical-problem-solving
Read more6/26/2024
🤖
0
Resolving Ethics Trade-offs in Implementing Responsible AI
Conrad Sanderson, Emma Schleiger, David Douglas, Petra Kuhnert, Qinghua Lu
While the operationalisation of high-level AI ethics principles into practical AI/ML systems has made progress, there is still a theory-practice gap in managing tensions between the underlying AI ethics aspects. We cover five approaches for addressing the tensions via trade-offs, ranging from rudimentary to complex. The approaches differ in the types of considered context, scope, methods for measuring contexts, and degree of justification. None of the approaches is likely to be appropriate for all organisations, systems, or applications. To address this, we propose a framework which consists of: (i) proactive identification of tensions, (ii) prioritisation and weighting of ethics aspects, (iii) justification and documentation of trade-off decisions. The proposed framework aims to facilitate the implementation of well-rounded AI/ML systems that are appropriate for potential regulatory requirements.
Read more9/10/2024
0
Trustworthy AI in practice: an analysis of practitioners' needs and challenges
Maria Teresa Baldassarre, Domenico Gigante, Marcos Kalinowski, Azzurra Ragone, Sara Tibid`o
Recently, there has been growing attention on behalf of both academic and practice communities towards the ability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems to operate responsibly and ethically. As a result, a plethora of frameworks and guidelines have appeared to support practitioners in implementing Trustworthy AI applications (TAI). However, little research has been done to investigate whether such frameworks are being used and how. In this work, we study the vision AI practitioners have on TAI principles, how they address them, and what they would like to have - in terms of tools, knowledge, or guidelines - when they attempt to incorporate such principles into the systems they develop. Through a survey and semi-structured interviews, we systematically investigated practitioners' challenges and needs in developing TAI systems. Based on these practical findings, we highlight recommendations to help AI practitioners develop Trustworthy AI applications.
Read more7/18/2024