Normative Logics of Algorithmic Accountability

Algorithmic Accountability

“…Organizational and technical measures can be used to accomplish this. From an organizational perspective, companies can implement different governance instruments (e.g., establishing and enforcing development guidelines) to hold their employees accountable who are dealing with ML systems (Donia 2022;Schneider et al 2022). As such, algorithmic accountability can be part of a corporate digital responsibility strategy that is focused on taking responsibility for the ML systems that are developed or used in an organization (Lobschat et al 2021;Mueller 2022).…”

“…While it has been already widely investigated how such issues can be addressed (e.g., Liu et al 2022;Mehrabi et al 2021), many organizations still fail to mitigate the often unintended, negative outcomes of the ML systems they are developing, providing, and using. Thus, academics (e.g., Novelli et al 2023;Wieringa 2020) and policymakers (e.g., Mo ¨kander et al 2022;Smuha 2021) have put an increasing emphasis on the topic of algorithmic accountability to ensure the ethical development and use of such systems (Donia 2022).…”

Classification of Kinematic Data Using Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) for Smart Motion

“…Donia et al explore normative frameworks within XAI, articulating various perspectives including verification, representation, social license, fiduciary duty, and legal compliance. This dissection of approaches helps ensure that AI technologies satisfy ethical, social and legal standards, leading to superior AI governance and design in accordance with XAI responsibilities and societal expectations [141].…”

Distinguishing two features of accountability for AI technologies

“…Accountability comes in different forms and varieties across rich and overlapping strands of academic literature in the humanities, law and social sciences. Scholars in the AI ethics field have recently proposed systematic conceptualizations of accountability to address this complexity [8][9][10][11] . Several researchers in the field 8,10 take explicit inspiration from Bovens's influential analysis of accountability as a social relation, in which he describes accountability as: "a relationship between an actor and a forum, in which the actor has an obligation to explain and to justify his or her conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgement, and the actor may face consequences" 12 .A welcome development within the AI ethics landscape would be greater conceptual clarity on the distinction between the 'explaining' and 'facing the consequences' features of accountability, as well as the relation between them.This matters ethically, legally and politically, as these two core features of accountability -that is, giving an explanation, and facing the consequences -can come apart and pull in different directions.…”

“…Accountability comes in different forms and varieties across rich and overlapping strands of academic literature in the humanities, law and social sciences. Scholars in the AI ethics field have recently proposed systematic conceptualizations of accountability to address this complexity [8][9][10][11] . Several researchers in the field 8,10 take explicit inspiration from Bovens's influential analysis of accountability as a social relation, in which he describes accountability as: "a relationship between an actor and a forum, in which the actor has an obligation to explain and to justify his or her conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgement, and the actor may face consequences" 12 .…”