via University of Cambridge
A global hacker ‘red team’ and rewards for hunting algorithmic biases are just some of the recommendations from experts who argue that AI faces a ‘tech-lash’ unless firm measures are taken to increase public trust.
We need policy and public support to create an ecosystem of trust for AI
Shahar Avin
The Artificial Intelligence industry should create a global community of hackers and ‘threat modellers’ dedicated to stress-testing the harm potential of new AI products in order to earn the trust of governments and the public before it’s too late.
This is one of the recommendations made by an international team of risk and machine-learning experts, led by researchers at the University of Cambridge’s Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER), who have authored a new ‘call to action’ published in the journal Science.
They say that companies building intelligent technologies should harness techniques such as ‘red team’ hacking, audit trails and ‘bias bounties’ – paying out rewards for revealing ethical flaws – to prove their integrity before releasing AI for use on the wider public.
Otherwise, the industry faces a ‘crisis of trust’ in the systems that increasingly underpin our society, as public concern continues to mount over everything from driverless cars and autonomous drones to secret social media algorithms that spread misinformation and provoke political turmoil.
The novelty and ‘black box’ nature of AI systems, and ferocious competition in the race to the marketplace, has hindered development and adoption of auditing or third party analysis, according to lead author Dr Shahar Avin of CSER.
The experts argue that incentives to increase trustworthiness should not be limited to regulation, but must also come from within an industry yet to fully comprehend that public trust is vital for its own future – and trust is fraying.
The new publication puts forward a series of ‘concrete’ measures that they say should be adopted by AI developers.
“There are critical gaps in the processes required to create AI that has earned public trust. Some of these gaps have enabled questionable behavior that is now tarnishing the entire field,” said Avin.
“We are starting to see a public backlash against technology. This ‘tech-lash’ can be all encompassing: either all AI is good or all AI is bad.
“Governments and the public need to be able to easily identify the trustworthy, the snake-oil salesmen, and the clueless,” Avin said. “Once you can do that, there is a real incentive to be trustworthy. But while you can’t tell them apart, there is a lot of pressure to cut corners.”
Co-author and CSER researcher Haydn Belfield said: “Most AI developers want to act responsibly and safely, but it’s been unclear what concrete steps they can take until now. Our report fills in some of these gaps.”
The idea of AI ‘red teaming’ – sometimes known as white-hat hacking – takes its cue from cyber-security.
“Red teams are ethical hackers playing the role of malign external agents,” said Avin. “They would be called in to attack any new AI, or strategise on how to use it for malicious purposes, in order to reveal any weaknesses or potential for harm.”
While a few big companies have internal capacity to “red team” – which comes with its own ethical conflicts – the report calls for a third-party community, one that can independently interrogate new AI and share any findings for the benefit of all developers.
A global resource could also offer high quality red teaming to the small start-up companies and research labs developing AI that could become ubiquitous.
The new report, a concise update of more detailed recommendations published by a group of 59 experts last year, also highlights the potential for bias and safety “bounties” to increase openness and public trust in AI.
This means financially rewarding any researcher who uncovers flaws in AI that have the potential to compromise public trust or safety – such as racial or socioeconomic biases in algorithms used for medical or recruitment purposes.
Earlier this year, Twitter began offering bounties to those who could identify biases in their image-cropping algorithm.
Companies would benefit from these discoveries, say researchers, and be given time to address them before they are publicly revealed. Avin points out that, currently, much of this “pushing and prodding” is done on a limited, ad-hoc basis by academics and investigative journalists.
The report also calls for auditing by trusted external agencies – and for open standards on how to document AI to make such auditing possible – along with platforms dedicated to sharing “incidents”: cases of undesired AI behavior that could cause harm to humans.
These, along with meaningful consequences for failing an external audit, would significantly contribute to an “ecosystem of trust” say the researchers.
“Some may question whether our recommendations conflict with commercial interests, but other safety-critical industries, such as the automotive or pharmaceutical industry, manage it perfectly well,” said Belfield.
“Lives and livelihoods are ever more reliant on AI that is closed to scrutiny, and that is a recipe for a crisis of trust. It’s time for the industry to move beyond well-meaning ethical principles and implement real-world mechanisms to address this,” he said.
Added Avin: “We are grateful to our collaborators who have highlighted a range of initiatives aimed at tackling these challenges, but we need policy and public support to create an ecosystem of trust for AI.”
Original Article: Community of ethical hackers needed to prevent AI’s looming ‘crisis of trust’
More from: University of Cambridge
The Latest Updates from Bing News & Google News
Go deeper with Bing News on:
Algorithmic biases
- CYNTHIA DELGADO AND NEIL POWE NAMED TO TIME100 HEALTH LIST FOR FIGHTING KIDNEY TRANSPLANT BIAS
The magazine recognized Cynthia Delgado, MD, FASN and Neil Powe, MD, MPH, MBA for their efforts to correct racial bias in the algorithm used to diagnose kidney diseases, an algorithm that often ...
- Small-Business Owners Should Embrace Responsible AI, says GoDaddy
As outlined in our newly released 2023 Sustainability Report, GoDaddy leaders understand the significance of responsible AI, which is why we remain vigilant in encouraging ongoing dialogue and ...
- Relying too heavily on Google can lead you into this common mental trap, says decision-making expert
The search engine can feed one's availability bias, or the tendency to think easily accessible information is the most factual information.
- Colorado small businesses express worry about bill seeking to combat 'algorithmic discrimination' in AI systems
Senate Bill 205 in Colorado seeks to enhance consumer protections against AI discrimination, but concerns persist regarding its impact on small businesses and innovation.
- How does AI learn its bias
Artificial intelligence (AI) promises to revolutionize our world, but it has a dark side: bias. AI systems can unintentionally inherit human prejudices, leading to unfair and sometimes harmful ...
Go deeper with Google Headlines on:
Algorithmic biases
[google_news title=”” keyword=”algorithmic biases” num_posts=”5″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]
Go deeper with Bing News on:
AI and public trust
- Trust in research companies stable, but AI poses reputational risks to sector
GLOBAL – Public trust in market research organisations remains positive, but concerns over AI could negatively impact the trust people place in research companies, according to the Global Research ...
- Joe Hong on building trust in AI within CMS
Director, Division of Program and Data Management, Financial Management Systems Group | Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ...
- Avant Technologies to Implement AI-Empowered, Zero Trust Architecture in Its Data Centers
Avant Technologies, Inc. (OTCQB: AVAI) (“Avant” or the “Company”), an artificial intelligence technology (AI) company specializing in the development of advanced AI and data center infrastructure ...
- Our government shouldn’t use the public sector as a guinea pig for AI
With governments on pace to adopt more technology, it’s imperative that any new tools are thoroughly evaluated and tested before they are released into the world.
- Can we really trust AI to channel the public’s voice for ministers?
Large-language models such as ChatGPT are still liable to distort the meaning of what they are summarising, says academic Seth Lazar ...
Go deeper with Google Headlines on:
AI and public trust
[google_news title=”” keyword=”AI and public trust” num_posts=”5″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]