On the meaning of uncertainty for ethical AI: philosophy and practice
Cassandra Bird, Daniel Williamson, Sabina Leonelli (University of, Exeter)

TL;DR
This paper explores how explicitly acknowledging the statistical foundations of AI can improve accountability, transparency, and ethical considerations, demonstrated through COVID-19 model analysis for the UK government.
Contribution
It introduces a method to incorporate ethical considerations into statistical reasoning by extending Posterior Belief Assessment for complex AI structures.
Findings
Enhanced model responsiveness to feedback
Improved interpretation of uncertainty in AI outputs
Increased transparency for evaluation
Abstract
Whether and how data scientists, statisticians and modellers should be accountable for the AI systems they develop remains a controversial and highly debated topic, especially given the complexity of AI systems and the difficulties in comparing and synthesising competing claims arising from their deployment for data analysis. This paper proposes to address this issue by decreasing the opacity and heightening the accountability of decision making using AI systems, through the explicit acknowledgement of the statistical foundations that underpin their development and the ways in which these dictate how their results should be interpreted and acted upon by users. In turn, this enhances (1) the responsiveness of the models to feedback, (2) the quality and meaning of uncertainty on their outputs and (3) their transparency to evaluation. To exemplify this approach, we extend Posterior Belief…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) · Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
