-
Lessons Learned in Performing a Trustworthy AI and Fundamental Rights Assessment
Authors:
Marjolein Boonstra,
Frédérick Bruneault,
Subrata Chakraborty,
Tjitske Faber,
Alessio Gallucci,
Eleanore Hickman,
Gerard Kema,
Hee** Kim,
Jaap Kooiker,
Elisabeth Hildt,
Annegret Lamadé,
Emilie Wiinblad Mathez,
Florian Möslein,
Genien Pathuis,
Giovanni Sartor,
Marijke Steege,
Alice Stocco,
Willy Tadema,
Jarno Tuimala,
Isabel van Vledder,
Dennis Vetter,
Jana Vetter,
Magnus Westerlund,
Roberto V. Zicari
Abstract:
This report shares the experiences, results and lessons learned in conducting a pilot project ``Responsible use of AI'' in cooperation with the Province of Friesland, Rijks ICT Gilde-part of the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (BZK) (both in The Netherlands) and a group of members of the Z-Inspection$^{\small{\circledR}}$ Initiative. The pilot project took place from May 2022 throug…
▽ More
This report shares the experiences, results and lessons learned in conducting a pilot project ``Responsible use of AI'' in cooperation with the Province of Friesland, Rijks ICT Gilde-part of the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (BZK) (both in The Netherlands) and a group of members of the Z-Inspection$^{\small{\circledR}}$ Initiative. The pilot project took place from May 2022 through January 2023. During the pilot, the practical application of a deep learning algorithm from the province of Frŷslan was assessed. The AI maps heathland grassland by means of satellite images for monitoring nature reserves. Environmental monitoring is one of the crucial activities carried on by society for several purposes ranging from maintaining standards on drinkable water to quantifying the CO2 emissions of a particular state or region. Using satellite imagery and machine learning to support decisions is becoming an important part of environmental monitoring. The main focus of this report is to share the experiences, results and lessons learned from performing both a Trustworthy AI assessment using the Z-Inspection$^{\small{\circledR}}$ process and the EU framework for Trustworthy AI, and combining it with a Fundamental Rights assessment using the Fundamental Rights and Algorithms Impact Assessment (FRAIA) as recommended by the Dutch government for the use of AI algorithms by the Dutch public authorities.
△ Less
Submitted 22 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
Using Sentence Embeddings and Semantic Similarity for Seeking Consensus when Assessing Trustworthy AI
Authors:
Dennis Vetter,
Jesmin Jahan Tithi,
Magnus Westerlund,
Roberto V. Zicari,
Gemma Roig
Abstract:
Assessing the trustworthiness of artificial intelligence systems requires knowledge from many different disciplines. These disciplines do not necessarily share concepts between them and might use words with different meanings, or even use the same words differently. Additionally, experts from different disciplines might not be aware of specialized terms readily used in other disciplines. Therefore…
▽ More
Assessing the trustworthiness of artificial intelligence systems requires knowledge from many different disciplines. These disciplines do not necessarily share concepts between them and might use words with different meanings, or even use the same words differently. Additionally, experts from different disciplines might not be aware of specialized terms readily used in other disciplines. Therefore, a core challenge of the assessment process is to identify when experts from different disciplines talk about the same problem but use different terminologies. In other words, the problem is to group problem descriptions (a.k.a. issues) with the same semantic meaning but described using slightly different terminologies.
In this work, we show how we employed recent advances in natural language processing, namely sentence embeddings and semantic textual similarity, to support this identification process and to bridge communication gaps in interdisciplinary teams of experts assessing the trustworthiness of an artificial intelligence system used in healthcare.
△ Less
Submitted 9 August, 2022;
originally announced August 2022.
-
How to Assess Trustworthy AI in Practice
Authors:
Roberto V. Zicari,
Julia Amann,
Frédérick Bruneault,
Megan Coffee,
Boris Düdder,
Eleanore Hickman,
Alessio Gallucci,
Thomas Krendl Gilbert,
Thilo Hagendorff,
Irmhild van Halem,
Elisabeth Hildt,
Sune Holm,
Georgios Kararigas,
Pedro Kringen,
Vince I. Madai,
Emilie Wiinblad Mathez,
Jesmin Jahan Tithi,
Dennis Vetter,
Magnus Westerlund,
Renee Wurth
Abstract:
This report is a methodological reflection on Z-Inspection$^{\small{\circledR}}$. Z-Inspection$^{\small{\circledR}}$ is a holistic process used to evaluate the trustworthiness of AI-based technologies at different stages of the AI lifecycle. It focuses, in particular, on the identification and discussion of ethical issues and tensions through the elaboration of socio-technical scenarios. It uses t…
▽ More
This report is a methodological reflection on Z-Inspection$^{\small{\circledR}}$. Z-Inspection$^{\small{\circledR}}$ is a holistic process used to evaluate the trustworthiness of AI-based technologies at different stages of the AI lifecycle. It focuses, in particular, on the identification and discussion of ethical issues and tensions through the elaboration of socio-technical scenarios. It uses the general European Union's High-Level Expert Group's (EU HLEG) guidelines for trustworthy AI. This report illustrates for both AI researchers and AI practitioners how the EU HLEG guidelines for trustworthy AI can be applied in practice. We share the lessons learned from conducting a series of independent assessments to evaluate the trustworthiness of AI systems in healthcare. We also share key recommendations and practical suggestions on how to ensure a rigorous trustworthy AI assessment throughout the life-cycle of an AI system.
△ Less
Submitted 28 June, 2022; v1 submitted 20 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
-
Benchmarking DataStax Enterprise/Cassandra with HiBench
Authors:
Todor Ivanov,
Raik Niemann,
Sead Izberovic,
Marten Rosselli,
Karsten Tolle,
Roberto V. Zicari
Abstract:
This report evaluates the new analytical capabilities of DataStax Enterprise (DSE) [1] through the use of standard Hadoop workloads. In particular, we run experiments with CPU and I/O bound micro-benchmarks as well as OLAP-style analytical query workloads. The performed tests should show that DSE is capable of successfully executing Hadoop applications without the need to adapt them for the underl…
▽ More
This report evaluates the new analytical capabilities of DataStax Enterprise (DSE) [1] through the use of standard Hadoop workloads. In particular, we run experiments with CPU and I/O bound micro-benchmarks as well as OLAP-style analytical query workloads. The performed tests should show that DSE is capable of successfully executing Hadoop applications without the need to adapt them for the underlying Cassandra distributed storage system [2]. Due to the Cassandra File System (CFS) [3], which supports the Hadoop Distributed File System API, Hadoop stack applications should seamlessly run in DSE. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 provides a brief description of the technologies involved in our study. An overview of our used hardware and software components of the experimental environment is given in Section 3. Our benchmark methodology is defined in Section 4. The performed experiments together with the evaluation of the results are presented in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 concludes with lessons learned.
△ Less
Submitted 16 December, 2014; v1 submitted 14 November, 2014;
originally announced November 2014.
-
Performance Evaluation of Virtualized Hadoop Clusters
Authors:
Todor Ivanov,
Roberto V. Zicari,
Sead Izberovic,
Karsten Tolle
Abstract:
In this report we investigate the performance of Hadoop clusters, deployed with separated storage and compute layers, on top of a hypervisor managing a single physical host. We have analyzed and evaluated the different Hadoop cluster configurations by running CPU bound and I/O bound workloads. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 provides a brief description of the technologies involved…
▽ More
In this report we investigate the performance of Hadoop clusters, deployed with separated storage and compute layers, on top of a hypervisor managing a single physical host. We have analyzed and evaluated the different Hadoop cluster configurations by running CPU bound and I/O bound workloads. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 provides a brief description of the technologies involved in our study. An overview of the experimental platform, setup test and configurations are presented in Section 3. Our benchmark methodology is defined in Section 4. The performed experiments together with the evaluation of the results are presented in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 concludes with lessons learned.
△ Less
Submitted 14 November, 2014;
originally announced November 2014.
-
On the inequality of the 3V's of Big Data Architectural Paradigms: A case for heterogeneity
Authors:
Todor Ivanov,
Nikolaos Korfiatis,
Roberto V. Zicari
Abstract:
The well-known 3V architectural paradigm for Big Data introduced by Laney (2011), provides a simplified framework for defining the architecture of a big data platform to be deployed in various scenarios tackling processing of massive datasets. While additional components such as Variability and Veracity have been discussed as an extension to the 3V model, the basic components (volume, variety, vel…
▽ More
The well-known 3V architectural paradigm for Big Data introduced by Laney (2011), provides a simplified framework for defining the architecture of a big data platform to be deployed in various scenarios tackling processing of massive datasets. While additional components such as Variability and Veracity have been discussed as an extension to the 3V model, the basic components (volume, variety, velocity) provide a quantitative framework while variability and veracity target a more qualitative approach. In this paper we argue why the basic 3V's are not equal due to the different requirements that need to be covered in case higher demands for a particular "V". Similar to other conjectures such as the CAP theorem 3V based architectures differ on their implementation. We call this paradigm heterogeneity and we provide a taxonomy of the existing tools (as of 2013) covering the Hadoop ecosystem from the perspective of heterogeneity. This paper contributes on the understanding of the Hadoop ecosystem from the perspective of different workloads and aims to help researchers and practitioners on the design of scalable platforms targeting different operational needs.
△ Less
Submitted 16 November, 2013; v1 submitted 4 November, 2013;
originally announced November 2013.
