REVIEW 1 cited by
Responsible AI by Design in Practice
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Recently, a lot of attention has been given to undesired consequences of Artificial Intelligence (AI), such as unfair bias leading to discrimination, or the lack of explanations of the results of AI systems. There are several important questions to answer before AI can be deployed at scale in our businesses and societies. Most of these issues are being discussed by experts and the wider communities, and it seems there is broad consensus on where they come from. There is, however, less consensus on, and experience with how to practically deal with those issues in organizations that develop and use AI, both from a technical and organizational perspective. In this paper, we discuss the practical case of a large organization that is putting in place a company-wide methodology to minimize the risk of undesired consequences of AI. We hope that other organizations can learn from this and that our experience contributes to making the best of AI while minimizing its risks.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Responsible Artificial Intelligence (RAI) in U.S. Federal Government : Principles, Policies, and Practices
A U.S. federal RAI policy review that maps executive orders, memos, and frameworks onto five RAI principles and describes Census Bureau implementation tools, with no new empirical findings.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.