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

· Explanation rather than technological transparency

Provide explanation in respect of decisions assisted made by AI systems where appropriate

Principle: "ARCC": An Ethical Framework for Artificial Intelligence, Sep 18, 2018

Published by Tencent Research Institute

Related Principles

· 1.3. Transparency and explainability

AI Actors should commit to transparency and responsible disclosure regarding AI systems. To this end, they should provide meaningful information, appropriate to the context, and consistent with the state of art: i. to foster a general understanding of AI systems; ii. to make stakeholders aware of their interactions with AI systems, including in the workplace; iii. to enable those affected by an AI system to understand the outcome; and, iv. to enable those adversely affected by an AI system to challenge its outcome based on plain and easy to understand information on the factors, and the logic that served as the basis for the prediction, recommendation or decision.

Published by G20 Ministerial Meeting on Trade and Digital Economy in G20 AI Principles, Jun 09, 2019

· 5. The Principle of Explicability: “Operate transparently”

Transparency is key to building and maintaining citizen’s trust in the developers of AI systems and AI systems themselves. Both technological and business model transparency matter from an ethical standpoint. Technological transparency implies that AI systems be auditable, comprehensible and intelligible by human beings at varying levels of comprehension and expertise. Business model transparency means that human beings are knowingly informed of the intention of developers and technology implementers of AI systems. Explicability is a precondition for achieving informed consent from individuals interacting with AI systems and in order to ensure that the principle of explicability and non maleficence are achieved the requirement of informed consent should be sought. Explicability also requires accountability measures be put in place. Individuals and groups may request evidence of the baseline parameters and instructions given as inputs for AI decision making (the discovery or prediction sought by an AI system or the factors involved in the discovery or prediction made) by the organisations and developers of an AI system, the technology implementers, or another party in the supply chain.

Published by The European Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence in Draft Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI, Dec 18, 2018

3. Artificial intelligence systems transparency and intelligibility should be improved, with the objective of effective implementation, in particular by:

a. investing in public and private scientific research on explainable artificial intelligence, b. promoting transparency, intelligibility and reachability, for instance through the development of innovative ways of communication, taking into account the different levels of transparency and information required for each relevant audience, c. making organizations’ practices more transparent, notably by promoting algorithmic transparency and the auditability of systems, while ensuring meaningfulness of the information provided, and d. guaranteeing the right to informational self determination, notably by ensuring that individuals are always informed appropriately when they are interacting directly with an artificial intelligence system or when they provide personal data to be processed by such systems, e. providing adequate information on the purpose and effects of artificial intelligence systems in order to verify continuous alignment with expectation of individuals and to enable overall human control on such systems.

Published by 40th International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners (ICDPPC) in Declaration On Ethics And Data Protection In Artifical Intelligence, Oct 23, 2018

· 1.5 Liability of AI Systems Due to Autonomy

The use of AI to make autonomous consequential decisions about people, informed by – but often replacing decisions made by – human driven bureaucratic processes, has led to concerns about liability. Acknowledging existing legal and regulatory frameworks, we are committed to partnering with relevant stakeholders to inform a reasonable accountability framework for all entities in the context of autonomous systems.

Published by Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) in AI Policy Principles, Oct 24, 2017

· 1.3. Transparency and explainability

AI Actors should commit to transparency and responsible disclosure regarding AI systems. To this end, they should provide meaningful information, appropriate to the context, and consistent with the state of art: i. to foster a general understanding of AI systems, ii. to make stakeholders aware of their interactions with AI systems, including in the workplace, iii. to enable those affected by an AI system to understand the outcome, and, iv. to enable those adversely affected by an AI system to challenge its outcome based on plain and easy to understand information on the factors, and the logic that served as the basis for the prediction, recommendation or decision.

Published by The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence, May 22, 2019