(1) Human centric
Utilization of AI should not infringe upon fundamental human rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution and international norms.
AI should be developed and utilized and implemented in society to expand the abilities of people and to pursue the diverse concepts of happiness of diverse people. In the AI utilized society, it is desirable that we implement appropriate mechanisms of literacy education and promotion of proper uses, so as not to over depend on AI or not to ill manipulate human decisions by exploiting AI.
AI can expand human abilities and creativity not only by replacing part of human task but also by assisting human as an advanced instrument.
When using AI, people must judge and decide for themselves how to use AI. Appropriate stakeholders involved in the development, provision, and utilization of AI should be responsible for the result of AI utilization, depending on the nature of the issue.
In order to avoid creating digital divide and allow all people to reap the benefit of AI regardless of their digital expertise, each stakeholder should take into consideration to user friendliness of the system in the process of AI deployment.
In a society premised on AI, we have to eliminate disparities, divisions, or socially weak people. Therefore, policy makers and managers of the enterprises involved in AI must have an accurate understanding of AI, the knowledge for proper use of AI in society and AI ethics, taking into account the complexity of AI and the possibility that AI can be misused intentionally. The AI user should understand the outline of AI and be educated to utilize it properly because AI is much more complicated than the already developed conventional tools. On the other hand, from the viewpoint of AI’s contributions to society, it is important for the developers of AI to learn about the social sciences, business models, and ethics, including normative awareness of norms and wide range of liberal arts not to mention the basis possibly generated by AI.
From the above point of view, it is necessary to establish an educational environment that provides AI literacy according to the following principles, equally to every person.
In order to get rid of disparity between people having a good knowledge about AI technology and those being weak in it, opportunities for education such as AI literacy are widely provided in early childhood education and primary and secondary education. The opportunities of learning about AI should be provided for the elderly people as well as workforce generation.
Our society needs an education scheme by which anyone should be able to learn AI, mathematics, and data science beyond the boundaries of literature and science. Literacy education provides the following contents: 1) Data used by AI are usually contaminated by bias, 2) AI is easy to generate unwanted bias in its use, and 3) The issues of impartiality, fairness, and privacy protection which are inherent to actual use of AI.
In a society in which AI is widely used, the educational environment is expected to change from the current unilateral and uniform teaching style to one that matches the interests and skill level of each individual person. Therefore, the society probably shares the view that the education system will change constantly to the above mentioned education style, regardless of the success experience in the educational system of the past. In education, it is especially important to avoid dropouts. For this, it is desirable to introduce an interactive educational environment which fully utilizes AI technologies and allows students to work together to feel a kind accomplishment.
In order to develop such an educational environment, it is desirable that companies and citizens work on their own initiative, not to burden administrations and schools (teachers).
Positive utilization of AI means that many social systems will be automated, and the safety of the systems will be improved. On the other hand, within the scope of today's technologies, it is impossible for AI to respond appropriately to rare events or deliberate attacks. Therefore, there is a new security risk for the use of AI. Society should always be aware of the balance of benefits and risks, and should work to improve social safety and sustainability as a whole.
Society must promote broad and deep research and development in AI (from immediate measures to deep understanding), such as the proper evaluation of risks in the utilization of AI and research to reduce risks. Society must also pay attention to risk management, including cybersecurity awareness.
Society should always pay attention to sustainability in the use of AI. Society should not, in particular, be uniquely dependent on single AI or a few specified AI.
4. Governance of AI Autonomy (Human oversight)
Published by: The European Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence in Draft Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI
The correct approach to assuring properties such as safety, accuracy, adaptability, privacy, explicability, compliance with the rule of law and ethical conformity heavily depends on specific details of the AI system, its area of application, its level of impact on individuals, communities or society and its level of autonomy. The level of autonomy results from the use case and the degree of sophistication needed for a task. All other things being equal, the greater degree of autonomy that is given to an AI system, the more extensive testing and stricter governance is required. It must be ensured that AI systems continue to behave as intended when feedback signals become sparser.
Depending on the area of application and or the level of impact on individuals, communities or society of the AI system, different levels or instances of governance (incl. human oversight) will be necessary. This is relevant for a large number of AI applications, and more particularly for the use of AI to suggest or take decisions concerning individuals or communities (algorithmic decision support). Good governance of AI autonomy in this respect includes for instance more or earlier human intervention depending on the level of societal impact of the AI system. This also includes the predicament that a user of an AI system, particularly in a work or decision making environment, is allowed to deviate from a path or decision chosen or recommended by the AI system.
3. Principle of controllability
Published by: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC), the Government of Japan in AI R&D Principles
Developers should pay attention to the controllability of AI systems.
In order to assess the risks related to the controllability of AI systems, it is encouraged that developers make efforts to conduct verification and validation in advance. One of the conceivable methods of risk assessment is to conduct experiments in a closed space such as in a laboratory or a sandbox in which security is ensured, at a stage before the practical application in society.
In addition, in order to ensure the controllability of AI systems, it is encouraged that developers pay attention to whether the supervision (such as monitoring or warnings) and countermeasures (such as system shutdown, cut off from networks, or repairs) by humans or other trustworthy AI systems are effective, to the extent possible in light of the characteristics of the technologies to be adopted.
Verification and validation are methods for evaluating and controlling risks in advance. Generally, the former is used for confirming formal consistency, while the latter is used for confirming substantial validity. (See, e.g., The Future of Life Institute (FLI), Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence (2015)).
Examples of what to see in the risk assessment are risks of reward hacking in which AI systems formally achieve the goals assigned but substantially do not meet the developer's intents, and risks that AI systems work in ways that the developers have not intended due to the changes of their outputs and programs in the process of the utilization with their learning, etc. For reward hacking, see, e.g., Dario Amodei, Chris Olah, Jacob Steinhardt, Paul Christiano, John Schulman & Dan Mané, Concrete Problems in AI Safety, arXiv: 1606.06565 [cs.AI] (2016).