scholarly journals A Critical Take on the Policy Recommendations of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Veale
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Eu

scholarly journals A Critical Take on the Policy Recommendations of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Veale
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Modern Information ◽  
Commission President ◽  
High Level ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
The Eu

Cite as Michael Veale, ‘A Critical Take on the Policy Recommendations of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence’ (2020) __ European Journal of Risk Regulation __. doi:10/ggjdjsThe European Commission recently published the policy recommendations of its ‘High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence’: a heavily anticipated document, particularly in the context of the stated ambition of the new Commission President to regulate in that area. This essay argues that these recommendations have significant deficits in a range of areas. It analyses a selection of the Group’s proposals in context of the governance of artificial intelligence more broadly, focussing on issues of framing, representation and expertise, and on the lack of acknowledgement of key issues of power and infrastructure underpinning modern information economies and practices of optimisation.

scholarly journals A Critical Take on the Policy Recommendations of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael VEALE
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Modern Information ◽  
Commission President ◽  
High Level ◽  
Selection Of ◽  
The Eu

The European Commission recently published the policy recommendations of its “High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence”: a heavily anticipated document, particularly in the context of the stated ambition of the new Commission President to regulate in that area. This article argues that these recommendations have significant deficits in a range of areas. It analyses a selection of the Group’s proposals in context of the governance of artificial intelligence more broadly, focusing on issues of framing, representation and expertise, and on the lack of acknowledgement of key issues of power and infrastructure underpinning modern information economies and practices of optimisation.

A framework for a data interest analysis of artificial intelligence

First Monday ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gry Hasselbalch
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Applied Ethics ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Governance Framework ◽  
Ethics Guidelines ◽  
High Level ◽  
Ethical Governance ◽  
The Eu

This article makes a case for a data interest analysis of artificial intelligence (AI) that explores how different interests in data are empowered or disempowered by design. The article uses the EU High-Level Expert Group on AI’s Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI as an applied ethics approach to data interests with a human-centric ethical governance framework and accordingly suggests ethical questions that will help resolve conflicts between data interests in AI design

scholarly journals On the Governance of Artificial Intelligence through Ethics Guidelines

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Stefan LARSSON
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Policy Area ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
Ethics Guidelines ◽  
High Level ◽  
Eu Commission ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This article uses a socio-legal perspective to analyze the use of ethics guidelines as a governance tool in the development and use of artificial intelligence (AI). This has become a central policy area in several large jurisdictions, including China and Japan, as well as the EU, focused on here. Particular emphasis in this article is placed on the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI published by the EU Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence in April 2019, as well as the White Paper on AI, published by the EU Commission in February 2020. The guidelines are reflected against partially overlapping and already-existing legislation as well as the ephemeral concept construct surrounding AI as such. The article concludes by pointing to (1) the challenges of a temporal discrepancy between technological and legal change, (2) the need for moving from principle to process in the governance of AI, and (3) the multidisciplinary needs in the study of contemporary applications of data-dependent AI.

Europe

2020 ◽  
pp. 649-666
Author(s):  
Andrea Renda
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Digital Technology ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Ethical Guidelines ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Strong Focus ◽  
Ethics Guidelines ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
High Level

This chapter assesses Europe’s efforts in developing a full-fledged strategy on the human and ethical implications of artificial intelligence (AI). The strong focus on ethics in the European Union’s AI strategy should be seen in the context of an overall strategy that aims at protecting citizens and civil society from abuses of digital technology but also as part of a competitiveness-oriented strategy aimed at raising the standards for access to Europe’s wealthy Single Market. In this context, one of the most peculiar steps in the European Union’s strategy was the creation of an independent High-Level Expert Group on AI (AI HLEG), accompanied by the launch of an AI Alliance, which quickly attracted several hundred participants. The AI HLEG, a multistakeholder group including fifty-two experts, was tasked with the definition of Ethics Guidelines as well as with the formulation of “Policy and Investment Recommendations.” With the advice of the AI HLEG, the European Commission put forward ethical guidelines for Trustworthy AI—which are now paving the way for a comprehensive, risk-based policy framework.

scholarly journals Of Duels, Trials and Simplifying Systems

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 683-692
Author(s):  
Giovanni SILENO
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Disruptive Innovation ◽  
Short Paper ◽  
Technological Evolution ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Symbolic Systems ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Impact

This short paper aims to unpack some of the assumptions underlying the “Policy and Investment Recommendation for Trustworthy AI” provided by the High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (AI) appointed by the European Commission. It elaborates in particular on three aspects: on the technical-legal dimensions of trustworthy AI; on what we mean by AI; and on the impact of AI. The consequent analysis results in the identification, amongst others, of three recurrent simplifications, respectively concerning the definition of AI (sub-symbolic systems instead of “intelligent” informational processing systems), the interface between AI and institutions (neatly separated instead of continuity) and a plausible technological evolution (expecting a plateau instead of a potentially near-disruptive innovation).

scholarly journals Actionable Principles for Artificial Intelligence Policy: Three Pathways

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Stix
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Development Process ◽  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Governmental Policy ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
Ethics Guidelines ◽  
Multi Stakeholder ◽  
High Level

AbstractIn the development of governmental policy for artificial intelligence (AI) that is informed by ethics, one avenue currently pursued is that of drawing on “AI Ethics Principles”. However, these AI Ethics Principles often fail to be actioned in governmental policy. This paper proposes a novel framework for the development of ‘Actionable Principles for AI’. The approach acknowledges the relevance of AI Ethics Principles and homes in on methodological elements to increase their practical implementability in policy processes. As a case study, elements are extracted from the development process of the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI of the European Commission’s “High Level Expert Group on AI”. Subsequently, these elements are expanded on and evaluated in light of their ability to contribute to a prototype framework for the development of 'Actionable Principles for AI'. The paper proposes the following three propositions for the formation of such a prototype framework: (1) preliminary landscape assessments; (2) multi-stakeholder participation and cross-sectoral feedback; and, (3) mechanisms to support implementation and operationalizability.

scholarly journals Embedding Values in Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-409
Author(s):  
Ibo van de Poel
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Special Kind ◽  
Sociotechnical Systems ◽  
Artificial Agents ◽  
Sociotechnical System ◽  
Respect For Autonomy ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Design Activities ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Organizations such as the EU High-Level Expert Group on AI and the IEEE have recently formulated ethical principles and (moral) values that should be adhered to in the design and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI). These include respect for autonomy, non-maleficence, fairness, transparency, explainability, and accountability. But how can we ensure and verify that an AI system actually respects these values? To help answer this question, I propose an account for determining when an AI system can be said to embody certain values. This account understands embodied values as the result of design activities intended to embed those values in such systems. AI systems are here understood as a special kind of sociotechnical system that, like traditional sociotechnical systems, are composed of technical artifacts, human agents, and institutions but—in addition—contain artificial agents and certain technical norms that regulate interactions between artificial agents and other elements of the system. The specific challenges and opportunities of embedding values in AI systems are discussed, and some lessons for better embedding values in AI systems are drawn.

scholarly journals In AI We Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 2749-2767
Author(s):  
Mark Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Interpersonal Trust ◽  
Expert Group ◽  
Human Relationships ◽  
Ai Ethics ◽  
Ethics Guidelines ◽  
High Level ◽  
Relationship Of

Abstract One of the main difficulties in assessing artificial intelligence (AI) is the tendency for people to anthropomorphise it. This becomes particularly problematic when we attach human moral activities to AI. For example, the European Commission’s High-level Expert Group on AI (HLEG) have adopted the position that we should establish a relationship of trust with AI and should cultivate trustworthy AI (HLEG AI Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI, 2019, p. 35). Trust is one of the most important and defining activities in human relationships, so proposing that AI should be trusted, is a very serious claim. This paper will show that AI cannot be something that has the capacity to be trusted according to the most prevalent definitions of trust because it does not possess emotive states or can be held responsible for their actions—requirements of the affective and normative accounts of trust. While AI meets all of the requirements of the rational account of trust, it will be shown that this is not actually a type of trust at all, but is instead, a form of reliance. Ultimately, even complex machines such as AI should not be viewed as trustworthy as this undermines the value of interpersonal trust, anthropomorphises AI, and diverts responsibility from those developing and using them.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document