A Costly Emergencies Approach to Estimating Costs for Artificial Intelligence Review

Sara R. Jordan
{"title":"A Costly Emergencies Approach to Estimating Costs for Artificial Intelligence Review","authors":"Sara R. Jordan","doi":"10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Artificial intelligence (AI) research is increasingly considered to be a risky endeavor. The present prevailing model of AI risk management imports the commitments of research ethics, in terms of principles, approach to risk assessment, mitigation, and management. Despite the history and appeal of the research ethics model, alternative models for evaluation of AI risk should be entertained before adopting this approach. Here we propose a hypothetical applied information economics approach that changes the model for risk review from ex ante hypotheticals paid for as a fixed cost borne by all to variable costs that could be calculated in response to consumers’ willingness to pay for risky technology or to be paid for by companies willing to shoulder the cost of risks. Some of these risks will be of such magnitude that mitigating them constitutes an existential emergency for which an ex-ante research review approach may be justifiable. But, for risks that are less than non-remediable, existential, threats, a more cost sensitive approach may represent a more equitable path that shifts costs to those willing to bear them. We approach thinking through AI risks as something with specific costs we can estimate using known risks from similar activities of daily life.","PeriodicalId":196560,"journal":{"name":"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISTAS50296.2020.9462212","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) research is increasingly considered to be a risky endeavor. The present prevailing model of AI risk management imports the commitments of research ethics, in terms of principles, approach to risk assessment, mitigation, and management. Despite the history and appeal of the research ethics model, alternative models for evaluation of AI risk should be entertained before adopting this approach. Here we propose a hypothetical applied information economics approach that changes the model for risk review from ex ante hypotheticals paid for as a fixed cost borne by all to variable costs that could be calculated in response to consumers’ willingness to pay for risky technology or to be paid for by companies willing to shoulder the cost of risks. Some of these risks will be of such magnitude that mitigating them constitutes an existential emergency for which an ex-ante research review approach may be justifiable. But, for risks that are less than non-remediable, existential, threats, a more cost sensitive approach may represent a more equitable path that shifts costs to those willing to bear them. We approach thinking through AI risks as something with specific costs we can estimate using known risks from similar activities of daily life.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能评估成本的昂贵应急方法
人工智能(AI)研究越来越被认为是一项冒险的努力。目前流行的人工智能风险管理模式在风险评估、缓解和管理的原则、方法方面引入了研究伦理的承诺。尽管研究伦理模型的历史和吸引力,在采用这种方法之前,应该考虑评估人工智能风险的其他模型。在这里,我们提出了一种假设的应用信息经济学方法,它改变了风险评估的模型,从预先假设的由所有人承担的固定成本,到可变成本,可变成本可以根据消费者愿意为风险技术支付的意愿来计算,或者由愿意承担风险成本的公司支付。其中一些风险将是如此之大,以至于减轻它们构成了存在的紧急情况,因此事前研究审查方法可能是合理的。但是,对于那些并非不可补救的、存在的威胁的风险,更注重成本的方法可能是一种更公平的途径,将成本转移给那些愿意承担的人。我们将人工智能风险视为具有特定成本的东西,我们可以使用日常生活中类似活动的已知风险来估算。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Historical and Ideological Chasm between Engineering and Development Sustainability means inclusivity: engaging citizens in early stage smart city development Taiwan’s Ability to Reduce the Transmission of COVID-19: A Success Story Tesseract Optimization for Data Privacy and Sharing Economics Using Open Source Licensing to Regulate the Assembly of LAWS: A Preliminary Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1