Bridging the Gap Between Ethics and Practice

Abstract

This article attempts to bridge the gap between widely discussed ethical principles of Human-centered AI (HCAI) and practical steps for effective governance. Since HCAI systems are developed and implemented in multiple organizational structures, I propose 15 recommendations at three levels of governance: team, organization, and industry. The recommendations are intended to increase the reliability, safety, and trustworthiness of HCAI systems: (1) reliable systems based on sound software engineering practices, (2) safety culture through business management strategies, and (3) trustworthy certification by independent oversight. Software engineering practices within teams include audit trails to enable analysis of failures, software engineering workflows, verification and validation testing, bias testing to enhance fairness, and explainable user interfaces. The safety culture within organizations comes from management strategies that include leadership commitment to safety, hiring and training oriented to safety, extensive reporting of failures and near misses, internal review boards for problems and future plans, and alignment with industry standard practices. The trustworthiness certification comes from industry-wide efforts that include government interventions and regulation, accounting firms conducting external audits, insurance companies compensating for failures, nongovernmental and civil society organizations advancing design principles, and professional organizations and research institutes developing standards, policies, and novel ideas. The larger goal of effective governance is to limit the dangers and increase the benefits of HCAI to individuals, organizations, and society. CCS Concepts: • Computing methodologies → Philosophical/theoretical foundations of artificial intelligence; • Human-centered computing → HCI theory, concepts and models; • Software and its engineering → Software development process management;

Corporate digital responsibility (CDR) in construction engineering—ethical guidelines for the application of digital transformation and artificial intelligence (AI) in user practice

“…Nevertheless, there is a lack of recognizing fields of application and potential. Knowledge of digital technologies and methods must first be acquired comprehensively in order for companies to be able to assume digital responsibility for something that many do not yet know or cannot assess [58]. It is a prerequisite for the greatest possible social benefit, economic prosperity and protection of our natural foundations of life.…”

A Deeper Look at Autonomous Vehicle Ethics: An Integrative Ethical Decision-Making Framework to Explain Moral Pluralism

“…An analysis of System 1 and System 2 in human ethical decision-making may be a way forward in designing systems that balance effectiveness and explanatory power. Third, human-centered AI (HCAI) provides clear goals to achieve reliable, safe, and trustworthy AI-embedded systems Shneiderman (2020) , yet how to achieve these goals is unclear. The variables used in this study such as individual and cultural factors, perceived moral intensity, and possible decision-making patterns can aid engineers in considering machine translatable ethical AV behaviors.…”

The Ethics of Privacy in Research and Design: Principles, Practices, and Potential

“…Thus, critically important is an iterative design process that continually assesses ethical consequences of design choices, follows ethically aligned standards [48], and ensures that individuals are able to determine the values and rules used in the process. Centering humans and their values in the loop is a key part of human-centric computing [49,50], where technological devices, algorithms, and systems are designed with consideration of the human impact, and human values are centered in the design process (see also value-sensitive design [51] and privacy by design [52]).…”