· 3. HUMANS ARE ALWAYS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE APPLICATION OF AN AIS

3.1. Supervision. AI Actors should provide comprehensive human supervision of any AIS to the extent and manner depending on the purpose of the AIS, including, for example, recording significant human decisions at all stages of the AIS life cycle or making provisions for the registration of the work of the AIS. They should also ensure the transparency of AIS use, including the possibility of cancellation by a person and (or) the prevention of making socially and legally significant decisions and actions by the AIS at any stage in its life cycle, where reasonably applicable. 3.2. Responsibility. AI Actors should not allow the transfer of rights of responsible moral choice to the AIS or delegate responsibility for the consequences of the AIS’s decision making. A person (an individual or legal entity recognized as the subject of responsibility in accordance with the legislation in force of the Russian Federation) must always be responsible for the consequences of the work of the AI Actors are encouraged to take all measures to determine the responsibilities of specific participants in the life cycle of the AIS, taking into account each participant’s role and the specifics of each stage.
Principle: Artificial Intelligence Code of Ethics, Oct 26, 2021

Published by AI Alliance Russia

Related Principles

5 DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION PRINCIPLE

AIS must meet intelligibility, justifiability, and accessibility criteria, and must be subjected to democratic scrutiny, debate, and control. 1) AIS processes that make decisions affecting a person’s life, quality of life, or reputation must be intelligible to their creators. 2) The decisions made by AIS affecting a person’s life, quality of life, or reputation should always be justifiable in a language that is understood by the people who use them or who are subjected to the consequences of their use. Justification consists in making transparent the most important factors and parameters shaping the decision, and should take the same form as the justification we would demand of a human making the same kind of decision. 3) The code for algorithms, whether public or private, must always be accessible to the relevant public authorities and stakeholders for verification and control purposes. 4) The discovery of AIS operating errors, unexpected or undesirable effects, security breaches, and data leaks must imperatively be reported to the relevant public authorities, stakeholders, and those affected by the situation. 5) In accordance with the transparency requirement for public decisions, the code for decision making algorithms used by public authorities must be accessible to all, with the exception of algorithms that present a high risk of serious danger if misused. 6) For public AIS that have a significant impact on the life of citizens, citizens should have the opportunity and skills to deliberate on the social parameters of these AIS, their objectives, and the limits of their use. 7) We must at all times be able to verify that AIS are doing what they were programmed for and what they are used for. 8) Any person using a service should know if a decision concerning them or affecting them was made by an AIS. 9) Any user of a service employing chatbots should be able to easily identify whether they are interacting with an AIS or a real person. 10) Artificial intelligence research should remain open and accessible to all.

Published by University of Montreal in The Montreal Declaration for a Responsible Development of Artificial Intelligence, Dec 4, 2018

(Preamble)

The Code of Ethics in the Field of Artificial Intelligence (hereinafter referred to as the Code) establishes the general ethical principles and standards of conduct that should be followed by participants in relation to the field of artificial intelligence (hereinafter referred to as AI Actors) in their activities, as well as the mechanisms for the implementation of the provisions of this Code. The Code applies to relationships related to the ethical aspects of the creation (design, construction, piloting), implementation and use of AI technologies at all stages that are currently not regulated by the legislation of the Russian Federation and or by acts of technical regulation. The recommendations of this Code are designed for artificial intelligence systems (hereinafter referred to as AIS) used exclusively for civil (not military) purposes. The provisions of the Code can be expanded and or specified for individual groups of AI Actors in industry specific or local documents on ethics in the field of AI, considering the development of technologies, the specifics of the tasks being solved, the class and purpose of the AIS and the level of possible risks, as well as the specific context and environment in which the AIS are being used.

Published by AI Alliance Russia in Artificial Intelligence Code of Ethics, Oct 26, 2021

· 1. THE MAIN PRIORITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF AI TECHNOLOGIES IS PROTECTING THE INTERESTS AND RIGHTS OF HUMAN BEINGS COLLECTIVELY AND AS INDIVIDUALS

1.1. Human centered and humanistic approach. In the development of AI technologies, the rights and freedoms of the individual should be given the greatest value. AI technologies developed by AI Actors should promote or not hinder the realization of humans’ capabilities to achieve harmony in social, economic and spiritual spheres, as well as in the highest self fulfillment of human beings. They should take into account key values such as the preservation and development of human cognitive abilities and creative potential; the preservation of moral, spiritual and cultural values; the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity and identity; and the preservation of traditions and the foundations of nations, peoples and ethnic and social groups. A human centered and humanistic approach is the basic ethical principle and central criterion for assessing the ethical behavior of AI Actors, which are listed in the section 2 of this Code. 1.2. Respect for human autonomy and freedom of will. AI Actors should take all necessary measures to preserve the autonomy and free will of a human‘s decision making ability, the right to choose, and, in general, the intellectual abilities of a human as an intrinsic value and a system forming factor of modern civilization. AI Actors should, during AIS creation, assess the possible negative consequences for the development of human cognitive abilities and prevent the development of AIS that purposefully cause such consequences. 1.3. Compliance with the law. AI Actors must know and comply with the provisions of the legislation of the Russian Federation in all areas of their activities and at all stages of the creation, development and use of AI technologies, including in matters of the legal responsibility of AI Actors. 1.4. Non discrimination. To ensure fairness and non discrimination, AI Actors should take measures to verify that the algorithms, datasets and processing methods for machine learning that are used to group and or classify data concerning individuals or groups do not intentionally discriminate. AI Actors are encouraged to create and apply methods and software solutions that identify and prevent discrimination based on race, nationality, gender, political views, religious beliefs, age, social and economic status, or information about private life. (At the same time, cannot be considered as discrimination rules, which are explicitly declared by an AI Actor for functioning or the application of AIS for the different groups of users, with such factors taken into account for segmentation) 1.5. Assessment of risks and humanitarian impact. AI Actors are encouraged to assess the potential risks of using an AIS, including the social consequences for individuals, society and the state, as well as the humanitarian impact of the AIS on human rights and freedoms at different stages, including during the formation and use of datasets. AI Actors should also carry out long term monitoring of the manifestations of such risks and take into account the complexity of the behavior of AIS during risk assessment, including the relationship and the interdependence of processes in the AIS’s life cycle. For critical applications of the AIS, in special cases, it is encouraged that a risk assessment be conducted through the involvement of a neutral third party or authorized official body when to do so would not harm the performance and information security of the AIS and would ensure the protection of the intellectual property and trade secrets of the developer.

Published by AI Alliance Russia in Artificial Intelligence Code of Ethics, Oct 26, 2021

· 1. Foundation of the code action

1.1. Legal basis of the Code. The Code takes into account the legislation of the Russian Federation,the Constitution of the Russian Federation and other regulatory legal acts and strategic planning documents. These include the National Strategy for the Development of Artificial Intelligence, the National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation and the Concept for the Regulation of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics. The Code also considers international treaties and agreements ratified by the Russian Federation applicable to issues ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens in the context of the use of information technologies. 1.2. Terminology. Terms and definitions in this Code are defined in accordance with applicable regulatory legal acts, strategic planning documents and technical regulation in the field of AI. 1.3. AI Actors. For the purposes of this Code, AI Actors is defined as persons, including foreign ones, participating in the life cycle of an AIS during its implementation in the territory of the Russian Federation or in relation to persons who are in the territory of the Russian Federation, including those involved in the provision of goods and services. Such persons include, but are not limited to, the following: developers who create, train, or test AI models systems and develop or implement such models systems, software and or hardware systems and take responsibility for their design; customers (individuals or organizations) receiving a product; or a service; data providers and persons involved in the formation of datasets for their use in AISs; experts who measure and or evaluate the parameters of the developed models systems; manufacturers engaged in the production of AIS; AIS operators who legally own the relevant systems, use them for their intended purpose and directly implement the solution to the problems that arise from using AIS; operators (individuals or organizations) carrying out the work of the AIS; persons with a regulatory impact in the field of AI, including the developers of regulatory and technical documents, manuals, various regulations, requirements, and standards in the field of AI; and other persons whose actions can affect the results of the actions of an AIS or persons who make decisions on the use of AIS.

Published by AI Alliance Russia in Artificial Intelligence Code of Ethics, Oct 26, 2021

· Transparency and explainability

The transparency and explainability of AI systems are often essential preconditions to ensure the respect, protection and promotion of human rights, fundamental freedoms and ethical principles. Transparency is necessary for relevant national and international liability regimes to work effectively. A lack of transparency could also undermine the possibility of effectively challenging decisions based on outcomes produced by AI systems and may thereby infringe the right to a fair trial and effective remedy, and limits the areas in which these systems can be legally used. While efforts need to be made to increase transparency and explainability of AI systems, including those with extra territorial impact, throughout their life cycle to support democratic governance, the level of transparency and explainability should always be appropriate to the context and impact, as there may be a need to balance between transparency and explainability and other principles such as privacy, safety and security. People should be fully informed when a decision is informed by or is made on the basis of AI algorithms, including when it affects their safety or human rights, and in those circumstances should have the opportunity to request explanatory information from the relevant AI actor or public sector institutions. In addition, individuals should be able to access the reasons for a decision affecting their rights and freedoms, and have the option of making submissions to a designated staff member of the private sector company or public sector institution able to review and correct the decision. AI actors should inform users when a product or service is provided directly or with the assistance of AI systems in a proper and timely manner. From a socio technical lens, greater transparency contributes to more peaceful, just, democratic and inclusive societies. It allows for public scrutiny that can decrease corruption and discrimination, and can also help detect and prevent negative impacts on human rights. Transparency aims at providing appropriate information to the respective addressees to enable their understanding and foster trust. Specific to the AI system, transparency can enable people to understand how each stage of an AI system is put in place, appropriate to the context and sensitivity of the AI system. It may also include insight into factors that affect a specific prediction or decision, and whether or not appropriate assurances (such as safety or fairness measures) are in place. In cases of serious threats of adverse human rights impacts, transparency may also require the sharing of code or datasets. Explainability refers to making intelligible and providing insight into the outcome of AI systems. The explainability of AI systems also refers to the understandability of the input, output and the functioning of each algorithmic building block and how it contributes to the outcome of the systems. Thus, explainability is closely related to transparency, as outcomes and ub processes leading to outcomes should aim to be understandable and traceable, appropriate to the context. AI actors should commit to ensuring that the algorithms developed are explainable. In the case of AI applications that impact the end user in a way that is not temporary, easily reversible or otherwise low risk, it should be ensured that the meaningful explanation is provided with any decision that resulted in the action taken in order for the outcome to be considered transparent. Transparency and explainability relate closely to adequate responsibility and accountability measures, as well as to the trustworthiness of AI systems.

Published by The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in Draft Text of The Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, Nov 24, 2021