Safe and Ethical AI (SEA) Platform Network · Linking Artificial Intelligence Principles (LAIP)

3. Auditability

Enable interested third parties to probe, understand, and review the behaviour of the algorithm through disclosure of information that enables monitoring, checking or criticism.

Principle: A compilation of existing AI ethical principles (Annex A), Jan 21, 2020

Published by Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC), Singapore

Related Principles

Auditability

Enable interested third parties to probe, understand, and review the behavior of the algorithm through disclosure of information that enables monitoring, checking, or criticism, including through provision of detailed documentation, technically suitable APIs, and permissive terms of use.

Published by Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in Machine Learning (FAT/ML) in Principles for Accountable Algorithms, Jul 22, 2016 (unconfirmed)

· Prepare Input Data:

1 The exercise of data procurement, management, and organization should uphold the legal frameworks and standards of data privacy. Data privacy and security protect information from a wide range of threats. 2 The confidentiality of data ensures that information is accessible only to those who are authorized to access the information and that there are specific controls that manage the delegation of authority. 3 Designers and engineers of the AI system must exhibit the appropriate levels of integrity to safeguard the accuracy and completeness of information and processing methods to ensure that the privacy and security legal framework and standards are followed. They should also ensure that the availability and storage of data are protected through suitable security database systems. 4 All processed data should be classified to ensure that it receives the appropriate level of protection in accordance with its sensitivity or security classification and that AI system developers and owners are aware of the classification or sensitivity of the information they are handling and the associated requirements to keep it secure. All data shall be classified in terms of business requirements, criticality, and sensitivity in order to prevent unauthorized disclosure or modification. Data classification should be conducted in a contextual manner that does not result in the inference of personal information. Furthermore, de identification mechanisms should be employed based on data classification as well as requirements relating to data protection laws. 5 Data backups and archiving actions should be taken in this stage to align with business continuity, disaster recovery and risk mitigation policies.

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

· Plan and Design:

1 When designing a transparent and trusted AI system, it is vital to ensure that stakeholders affected by AI systems are fully aware and informed of how outcomes are processed. They should further be given access to and an explanation of the rationale for decisions made by the AI technology in an understandable and contextual manner. Decisions should be traceable. AI system owners must define the level of transparency for different stakeholders on the technology based on data privacy, sensitivity, and authorization of the stakeholders. 2 The AI system should be designed to include an information section in the platform to give an overview of the AI model decisions as part of the overall transparency application of the technology. Information sharing as a sub principle should be adhered to with end users and stakeholders of the AI system upon request or open to the public, depending on the nature of the AI system and target market. The model should establish a process mechanism to log and address issues and complaints that arise to be able to resolve them in a transparent and explainable manner. Prepare Input Data: 1 The data sets and the processes that yield the AI system’s decision should be documented to the best possible standard to allow for traceability and an increase in transparency. 2 The data sets should be assessed in the context of their accuracy, suitability, validity, and source. This has a direct effect on the training and implementation of these systems since the criteria for the data’s organization, and structuring must be transparent and explainable in their acquisition and collection adhering to data privacy regulations and intellectual property standards and controls.

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

5. Data Provenance

A description of the way in which the training data was collected should be maintained by the builders of the algorithms, accompanied by an exploration of the potential biases induced by the human or algorithmic data gathering process. Public scrutiny of the data provides maximum opportunity for corrections. However, concerns over privacy, protecting trade secrets, or revelation of analytics that might allow malicious actors to game the system can justify restricting access to qualified and authorized individuals.

Published by ACM US Public Policy Council (USACM) in Principles for Algorithmic Transparency and Accountability, Jan 12, 2017

3 Ensure transparency, explainability and intelligibility

AI should be intelligible or understandable to developers, users and regulators. Two broad approaches to ensuring intelligibility are improving the transparency and explainability of AI technology. Transparency requires that sufficient information (described below) be published or documented before the design and deployment of an AI technology. Such information should facilitate meaningful public consultation and debate on how the AI technology is designed and how it should be used. Such information should continue to be published and documented regularly and in a timely manner after an AI technology is approved for use. Transparency will improve system quality and protect patient and public health safety. For instance, system evaluators require transparency in order to identify errors, and government regulators rely on transparency to conduct proper, effective oversight. It must be possible to audit an AI technology, including if something goes wrong. Transparency should include accurate information about the assumptions and limitations of the technology, operating protocols, the properties of the data (including methods of data collection, processing and labelling) and development of the algorithmic model. AI technologies should be explainable to the extent possible and according to the capacity of those to whom the explanation is directed. Data protection laws already create specific obligations of explainability for automated decision making. Those who might request or require an explanation should be well informed, and the educational information must be tailored to each population, including, for example, marginalized populations. Many AI technologies are complex, and the complexity might frustrate both the explainer and the person receiving the explanation. There is a possible trade off between full explainability of an algorithm (at the cost of accuracy) and improved accuracy (at the cost of explainability). All algorithms should be tested rigorously in the settings in which the technology will be used in order to ensure that it meets standards of safety and efficacy. The examination and validation should include the assumptions, operational protocols, data properties and output decisions of the AI technology. Tests and evaluations should be regular, transparent and of sufficient breadth to cover differences in the performance of the algorithm according to race, ethnicity, gender, age and other relevant human characteristics. There should be robust, independent oversight of such tests and evaluation to ensure that they are conducted safely and effectively. Health care institutions, health systems and public health agencies should regularly publish information about how decisions have been made for adoption of an AI technology and how the technology will be evaluated periodically, its uses, its known limitations and the role of decision making, which can facilitate external auditing and oversight.

Published by World Health Organization (WHO) in Key ethical principles for use of artificial intelligence for health, Jun 28, 2021