A Semantic Framework to Support AI System Accountability and Audit

To realise accountable AI systems, different types of information from a range of sources need to be recorded throughout the system life cycle. We argue that knowledge graphs may support capture and audit of such information; however, the creation of such accountability records must be planned and embedded within different life cycle stages, e.g., during the design of a system, during implementation, etc. We propose a provenance based approach to support not only the capture of accountability information, but also abstract descriptions of accountability plans that guide the data collection process, all as part of a single knowledge graph. In this paper we introduce the SAO ontology, a lightweight generic ontology for describing accountability plans and corresponding provenance traces of computational systems; the RAInS ontology, which extends SAO to model accountability information relevant to the design stage of AI systems; and a proof-of-concept implementation utilising the proposed ontologies to provide a visual interface for designing accountability plans, and managing accountability records.

[1]  Yolanda Gil,et al.  Augmenting PROV with Plans in P-PLAN: Scientific Processes as Linked Data , 2012, LISC@ISWC.

[2]  James Cheney,et al.  PROV-O: The PROV ontology:W3C recommendation 30 April 2013 , 2013 .

[3]  Dave Lewis,et al.  Modelling Provenance for GDPR Compliance using Linked Open Data Vocabularies , 2017, PrivOn@ISWC.

[4]  Harald C. Gall,et al.  Software Engineering for Machine Learning: A Case Study , 2019, 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP).

[5]  Deborah L. McGuinness,et al.  PROV-O: The PROV Ontology , 2013 .

[6]  Daniel Garijo,et al.  Linking Abstract Plans of Scientific Experiments to their Corresponding Execution Traces (short paper) , 2019, SciKnow@K-CAP.

[7]  Jens Lehmann,et al.  MEX vocabulary: a lightweight interchange format for machine learning experiments , 2015, SEMANTICS.

[8]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  NeOn Methodology for Building Ontology Networks: a Scenario-based Methodology , 2009 .

[9]  M. Cannarsa Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI , 2021, The Cambridge Handbook of Lawyering in the Digital Age.

[10]  Timnit Gebru,et al.  Datasheets for datasets , 2018, Commun. ACM.

[11]  Raja Chatila,et al.  The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems , 2019, Robotics and Well-Being.

[12]  Yulia Shichkina,et al.  A Knowledge-Based Computational Environment for Real-World Data Processing , 2019, ICCSA.

[13]  N. Diakopoulos Algorithmic Accountability Reporting: On the Investigation of Black Boxes , 2014 .

[14]  Wamberto Vasconcelos,et al.  Semantic Modelling of Plans and Execution Traces for Enhancing Transparency of IoT Systems , 2019, 2019 Sixth International Conference on Internet of Things: Systems, Management and Security (IOTSMS).

[15]  Inioluwa Deborah Raji,et al.  Model Cards for Model Reporting , 2018, FAT.

[16]  Maranke Wieringa,et al.  What to account for when accounting for algorithms: a systematic literature review on algorithmic accountability , 2020, FAT*.

[17]  Joseph Savirimuthu,et al.  The GDPR, AI and the NHS Code of Conduct for Data-Driven Health and Care Technology , 2020 .

[18]  Tim Menzies,et al.  The Five Laws of SE for AI , 2020, IEEE Software.

[19]  Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon,et al.  Provenance-based Explanations for Automated Decisions: Final IAA Project Report , 2019 .

[20]  Vasa Curcin,et al.  Templates as a method for implementing data provenance in decision support systems , 2017, J. Biomed. Informatics.

[21]  Joaquin Vanschoren,et al.  ML-Schema: Exposing the Semantics of Machine Learning with Schemas and Ontologies , 2018, ICML 2018.