3. Traceable

The department's AI capabilities will be developed and deployed such that relevant personnel possess an appropriate understanding of the technology, development processes and operational methods applicable to AI capabilities, including with transparent and auditable methodologies, data sources and design procedures and documentation.
Principle: DoD's AI ethical principles, Feb 24, 2020

Published by Department of Defense (DoD), United States

Related Principles

3. Traceable.

DoD’s AI engineering discipline should be sufficiently advanced such that technical experts possess an appropriate understanding of the technology, development processes, and operational methods of its AI systems, including transparent and auditable methodologies, data sources, and design procedure and documentation.

Published by Defense Innovation Board (DIB), Department of Defense (DoD), United States in AI Ethics Principles for DoD, Oct 31, 2019

· Independent Global AI Safety and Verification Research

Independent research into AI safety and verification is critical to develop techniques to ensure the safety of advanced AI systems. States, philanthropists, corporations and experts should enable global independent AI safety and verification research through a series of Global AI Safety and Verification Funds. These funds should scale to a significant fraction of global AI research and development expenditures to adequately support and grow independent research capacity. In addition to foundational AI safety research, these funds would focus on developing privacy preserving and secure verification methods, which act as enablers for domestic governance and international cooperation. These methods would allow states to credibly check an AI developer’s evaluation results, and whether mitigations specified in their safety case are in place. In the future, these methods may also allow states to verify safety related claims made by other states, including compliance with the Safety Assurance Frameworks and declarations of significant training runs. Eventually, comprehensive verification could take place through several methods, including third party governance (e.g., independent audits), software (e.g., audit trails) and hardware (e.g., hardware enabled mechanisms on AI chips). To ensure global trust, it will be important to have international collaborations developing and stress testing verification methods. Critically, despite broader geopolitical tensions, globally trusted verification methods have allowed, and could allow again, states to commit to specific international agreements.

Published by IDAIS (International Dialogues on AI Safety) in IDAIS-Venice, Sept 5, 2024

Design for human control, accountability, and intended use

Humans should have ultimate control of our technology, and we strive to prevent unintended use of our products. Our user experience enforces accountability, responsible use, and transparency of consequences. We build protections into our products to detect and avoid unintended system behaviors. We achieve this through modern software engineering and rigorous testing on our entire systems including their constituent data and AI products, in isolation and in concert. Additionally, we rely on ongoing user research to help ensure that our products function as expected and can be appropriately disabled when necessary. Accountability is enforced by providing customers with insight into the provenance of data sources, methodologies, and design processes in easily understood and transparent language. Effective governance — of data, models, and software — is foundational to the ethical and accountable deployment of AI.

Published by Rebelliondefense in AI Ethical Principles, January 2023

· Build and Validate:

1 To develop a sound and functional AI system that is both reliable and safe, the AI system’s technical construct should be accompanied by a comprehensive methodology to test the quality of the predictive data based systems and models according to standard policies and protocols. 2 To ensure the technical robustness of an AI system rigorous testing, validation, and re assessment as well as the integration of adequate mechanisms of oversight and controls into its development is required. System integration test sign off should be done with relevant stakeholders to minimize risks and liability. 3 Automated AI systems involving scenarios where decisions are understood to have an impact that is irreversible or difficult to reverse or may involve life and death decisions should trigger human oversight and final determination. Furthermore, AI systems should not be used for social scoring or mass surveillance purposes.

Published by SDAIA in AI Ethics Principles, Sept 14, 2022

3. Scientific Integrity and Information Quality

The government’s regulatory and non regulatory approaches to AI applications should leverage scientific and technical information and processes. Agencies should hold information, whether produced by the government or acquired by the government from third parties, that is likely to have a clear and substantial influence on important public policy or private sector decisions (including those made by consumers) to a high standard of quality, transparency, and compliance. Consistent with the principles of scientific integrity in the rulemaking and guidance processes, agencies should develop regulatory approaches to AI in a manner that both informs policy decisions and fosters public trust in AI. Best practices include transparently articulating the strengths, weaknesses, intended optimizations or outcomes, bias mitigation, and appropriate uses of the AI application’s results. Agencies should also be mindful that, for AI applications to produce predictable, reliable, and optimized outcomes, data used to train the AI system must be of sufficient quality for the intended use.

Published by The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), United States in Principles for the Stewardship of AI Applications, Nov 17, 2020