AI for the Common Good?! Pitfalls, challenges, and ethics pen-testing

Abstract Recently, many AI researchers and practitioners have embarked on research visions that involve doing AI for “Good”. This is part of a general drive towards infusing AI research and practice with ethical thinking. One frequent theme in current ethical guidelines is the requirement that AI be good for all, or: contribute to the Common Good. Butwhat is the Common Good, and is it enough to want to be good? Via four lead questions, I will illustrate challenges and pitfallswhen determining, from an AI point of view,what the Common Good is and how it can be enhanced by AI. The questions are: What is the problem / What is a problem?, Who defines the problem?, What is the role of knowledge?, and What are important side effects and dynamics? The illustration will use an example from the domain of “AI for Social Good”, more specifically “Data Science for Social Good”. Even if the importance of these questions may be known at an abstract level, they do not get asked sufficiently in practice, as shown by an exploratory study of 99 contributions to recent conferences in the field. Turning these challenges and pitfalls into a positive recommendation, as a conclusion I will draw on another characteristic of computer-science thinking and practice to make these impediments visible and attenuate them: “attacks” as a method for improving design. This results in the proposal of ethics pen-testing as a method for helping AI designs to better contribute to the Common Good.

[1]  Susanna Flavia Boxall,et al.  Legalize It All , 2016 .

[2]  Rajendra Akerkar,et al.  Knowledge Based Systems , 2017, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[3]  Frank Dignum,et al.  Societal Challenges Need Social Agents , 2017, AAAI Spring Symposia.

[4]  T. Graepel,et al.  Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[5]  Dietram A. Scheufele,et al.  News Framing Theory and Research , 2009, Media Effects.

[6]  Simon Rogerson,et al.  Ethics and Information Technology , 1997, Australas. J. Inf. Syst..

[7]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[8]  Andrew D. Selbst,et al.  Big Data's Disparate Impact , 2016 .

[9]  J. Fitzmaurice Economy and Society , 1998 .

[10]  Frederic Bartumeus,et al.  A Bayesian Framework for Reputation in Citizen Science , 2017 .

[11]  Evgeny Morozov,et al.  Book review: To save everything click here: the folly of technological solutionism , 2013 .

[12]  Sören Preibusch,et al.  Toward Accountable Discrimination-Aware Data Mining: The Importance of Keeping the Human in the Loop - and Under the Looking Glass , 2017, Big Data.

[13]  P. Asaro What Should We Want From a Robot Ethic? , 2020, Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics.

[14]  Dorris Scott,et al.  Food for Thought: Analyzing Public Opinion on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program , 2017, ArXiv.

[15]  Christian Blum Determining the Common Good: A (Re-)Constructive Critique of the Proceduralist Paradigm , 2012 .

[16]  Alexandra Chouldechova,et al.  Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments , 2016, Big Data.

[18]  Chia-Kai Liu,et al.  Data for Social Good : A Case Study of Building an Effective Public-Private Partnership on Domestic Violence Prevention , 2017 .

[19]  Nikhil A Patel,et al.  Professionalism and conflicting interests: the American Psychological Association's involvement in torture. , 2015, AMA journal of ethics.

[20]  K. Novak,et al.  DNA repair: The guardian , 2003, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[21]  Mahendra Prasad Back to the Future: A Framework for Modelling Altruistic Intelligence Explosions , 2017, AAAI Spring Symposia.

[22]  Joichi Ito,et al.  Interventions over Predictions: Reframing the Ethical Debate for Actuarial Risk Assessment , 2017, FAT.

[23]  D. Boyd,et al.  CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA , 2012 .

[24]  R. Shamir,et al.  The age of responsibilization: on market-embedded morality , 2008 .

[25]  G. DeFriese,et al.  The New York Times , 2020, Publishing for Libraries.

[26]  J. Goguen Requirements Engineering as the Reconciliation of Technical and Social Issues , 1994 .

[27]  Matevz Kunaver,et al.  Diversity in recommender systems - A survey , 2017, Knowl. Based Syst..

[28]  Bettina Berendt,et al.  "Tool Clinics" - Embracing Multiple Perspectives in Privacy Research and Privacy-Sensitive Design , 2013 .

[29]  Maximilian Jaede,et al.  The Concept of the Common Good , 2017 .

[30]  Samuel Fricker,et al.  Requirements Engineering: Best Practice , 2015 .

[31]  Helmut Krcmar,et al.  Big Data , 2014, Wirtschaftsinf..

[32]  Ieee Robotics,et al.  IEEE robotics & automation magazine , 1994 .

[33]  Oliver Bendel,et al.  LADYBIRD: The Animal-Friendly Robot Vacuum Cleaner , 2017, AAAI Spring Symposia.

[34]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  Requirements engineering: social and technical issues , 1994 .

[35]  Michael G. Dyer,et al.  BORIS - An Experiment in In-Depth Understanding of Narratives , 1983, Artif. Intell..

[36]  H. Daly,et al.  For the Common Good , 1999 .

[37]  Hywel T. P. Williams,et al.  Network analysis reveals open forums and echo chambers in social media discussions of climate change , 2015 .

[38]  P ? ? ? ? ? ? ? % ? ? ? ? , 1991 .

[39]  Audley Genus Rethinking constructive technology assessment as democratic, reflective, discourse , 2006 .

[40]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Self-reflection on privacy research in social networking sites , 2017, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[41]  Thomas R. Eisenmann,et al.  The Huffington Post , 2010 .

[42]  T. Heckelei,et al.  Global Environmental Change , 2018, The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology.

[43]  Loren G. Terveen,et al.  Exploring the filter bubble: the effect of using recommender systems on content diversity , 2014, WWW.

[44]  P Schofield,et al.  Annual Review of Law and Social Science 2013 , 2013 .

[45]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[46]  Katharina Reinecke,et al.  Choice Architecture for Human-Computer Interaction , 2014, Found. Trends Hum. Comput. Interact..

[47]  C. Allen,et al.  Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong , 2008 .

[48]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook , 2015, Science.

[49]  Arnaud Delaunay,et al.  Wandering Detection Within an Embedded System for Alzheimer Suffering Patients , 2017, AAAI Spring Symposia.

[50]  Cathy O'Neil Weapons of Math Destruction , 2016 .

[51]  S. Bird,et al.  Effectiveness of Scotland's National Naloxone Programme for reducing opioid‐related deaths: a before (2006–10) versus after (2011–13) comparison , 2016, Addiction.

[52]  Padhraic Smyth,et al.  Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining: Towards a Unifying Framework , 1996, KDD.

[53]  Ellen W. Zegura,et al.  Using data science as a community advocacy tool to promote equity in urban renewal programs: An analysis of Atlanta's Anti-Displacement Tax Fund , 2017, ArXiv.

[54]  Luci Pangrazio,et al.  Exploring provocation as a research method in the social sciences , 2017 .

[55]  Linnet Taylor,et al.  The ethics of big data as a public good: which public? Whose good? , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[56]  Gianmarco Veruggio,et al.  Roboethics [TC Spotlight] , 2010 .

[57]  Lucy Heckman,et al.  Harper's magazine , 1981 .

[58]  Suresh Venkatasubramanian,et al.  Runaway Feedback Loops in Predictive Policing , 2017, FAT.

[59]  Norman M. Sadeh,et al.  Towards a Roadmap for Privacy Technologies and the General Data Protection Regulation: A Transatlantic Initiative , 2018, APF.

[60]  Longbing Cao,et al.  Data Science , 2017, ACM Comput. Surv..

[61]  K. Popper,et al.  The Open Society and Its Enemies , 1946 .

[62]  Kyarash Shahriari,et al.  IEEE standard review — Ethically aligned design: A vision for prioritizing human wellbeing with artificial intelligence and autonomous systems , 2017, 2017 IEEE Canada International Humanitarian Technology Conference (IHTC).

[63]  calimaq « Information wants to be free », vous vous souvenez ? - @ Brest , 2012 .

[64]  Will Luers Information Wants to Be Free, Or Does It?: The Ethics of Datafication , 2017 .

[65]  E. Morozov,et al.  To Save Everything, Click Here , 2013 .

[66]  Bertram F. Malle,et al.  Integrating robot ethics and machine morality: the study and design of moral competence in robots , 2016, Ethics and Information Technology.

[67]  P. Cochat,et al.  Et al , 2008, Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie.

[68]  Linnet Taylor,et al.  Safety in Numbers? Group Privacy and Big Data Analytics in the Developing World , 2017 .

[69]  Christina Gloeckner,et al.  Pr A Social History Of Spin , 2016 .

[70]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  Requirements engineering as the reconciliation of social and technical issues , 1994 .

[71]  Harold A. Linstone,et al.  Technological forecasting and social change , 2011 .

[72]  L. Christophorou Science , 2018, Emerging Dynamics: Science, Energy, Society and Values.

[73]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scores , 2016, ITCS.

[74]  Guido Caldarelli,et al.  Echo Chambers: Emotional Contagion and Group Polarization on Facebook , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[75]  Edwin D. Mares,et al.  On S , 1994, Stud Logica.

[76]  P. Pini Addiction , 1996, The Lancet.

[77]  Annette N. Markham,et al.  Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Version 2.0 Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee , 2012 .

[78]  Linnet Taylor The Ethics of Big Data as a Public Good: Which Public? Whose Good? , 2016 .

[79]  G. Gobo,et al.  Perspectives on decolonising methodologies : Special Issue on International Journal of Social Research Methodology , 2011 .

[80]  K. Lum,et al.  To predict and serve? , 2016 .

[81]  Peter Naur,et al.  Formalization in program development , 1982, BIT.

[82]  Matthias Gross,et al.  Routledge International Handbook of Ignorance Studies , 2018 .

[83]  Giovanni Capoccia,et al.  Militant Democracy: The Institutional Bases of Democratic Self-Preservation , 2013 .

[84]  Andrei V. Yakushev,et al.  Social Networks Mining for Analysis and Modeling Drugs Usage , 2014, ICCS.