-
Towards Equitable Agile Research and Development of AI and Robotics
Authors:
Andrew Hundt,
Julia Schuller,
Severin Kacianka
Abstract:
Machine Learning (ML) and 'Artificial Intelligence' ('AI') methods tend to replicate and amplify existing biases and prejudices, as do Robots with AI. For example, robots with facial recognition have failed to identify Black Women as human, while others have categorized people, such as Black Men, as criminals based on appearance alone. A 'culture of modularity' means harms are perceived as 'out of…
▽ More
Machine Learning (ML) and 'Artificial Intelligence' ('AI') methods tend to replicate and amplify existing biases and prejudices, as do Robots with AI. For example, robots with facial recognition have failed to identify Black Women as human, while others have categorized people, such as Black Men, as criminals based on appearance alone. A 'culture of modularity' means harms are perceived as 'out of scope', or someone else's responsibility, throughout employment positions in the 'AI supply chain'. Incidents are routine enough (incidentdatabase.ai lists over 2000 examples) to indicate that few organizations are capable of completely respecting peoples' rights; meeting claimed equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI or DEI) goals; or recognizing and then addressing such failures in their organizations and artifacts. We propose a framework for adapting widely practiced Research and Development (R&D) project management methodologies to build organizational equity capabilities and better integrate known evidence-based best practices. We describe how project teams can organize and operationalize the most promising practices, skill sets, organizational cultures, and methods to detect and address rights-based fairness, equity, accountability, and ethical problems as early as possible when they are often less harmful and easier to mitigate; then monitor for unforeseen incidents to adaptively and constructively address them. Our primary example adapts an Agile development process based on Scrum, one of the most widely adopted approaches to organizing R&D teams. We also discuss limitations of our proposed framework and future research directions.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2024;
originally announced February 2024.
-
Robots Enact Malignant Stereotypes
Authors:
Andrew Hundt,
William Agnew,
Vicky Zeng,
Severin Kacianka,
Matthew Gombolay
Abstract:
Stereotypes, bias, and discrimination have been extensively documented in Machine Learning (ML) methods such as Computer Vision (CV) [18, 80], Natural Language Processing (NLP) [6], or both, in the case of large image and caption models such as OpenAI CLIP [14]. In this paper, we evaluate how ML bias manifests in robots that physically and autonomously act within the world. We audit one of several…
▽ More
Stereotypes, bias, and discrimination have been extensively documented in Machine Learning (ML) methods such as Computer Vision (CV) [18, 80], Natural Language Processing (NLP) [6], or both, in the case of large image and caption models such as OpenAI CLIP [14]. In this paper, we evaluate how ML bias manifests in robots that physically and autonomously act within the world. We audit one of several recently published CLIP-powered robotic manipulation methods, presenting it with objects that have pictures of human faces on the surface which vary across race and gender, alongside task descriptions that contain terms associated with common stereotypes. Our experiments definitively show robots acting out toxic stereotypes with respect to gender, race, and scientifically-discredited physiognomy, at scale. Furthermore, the audited methods are less likely to recognize Women and People of Color. Our interdisciplinary sociotechnical analysis synthesizes across fields and applications such as Science Technology and Society (STS), Critical Studies, History, Safety, Robotics, and AI. We find that robots powered by large datasets and Dissolution Models (sometimes called "foundation models", e.g. CLIP) that contain humans risk physically amplifying malignant stereotypes in general; and that merely correcting disparities will be insufficient for the complexity and scale of the problem. Instead, we recommend that robot learning methods that physically manifest stereotypes or other harmful outcomes be paused, reworked, or even wound down when appropriate, until outcomes can be proven safe, effective, and just. Finally, we discuss comprehensive policy changes and the potential of new interdisciplinary research on topics like Identity Safety Assessment Frameworks and Design Justice to better understand and address these harms.
△ Less
Submitted 23 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
-
Big data ethics, machine ethics or information ethics? Navigating the maze of applied ethics in IT
Authors:
Niina Zuber,
Severin Kacianka,
Jan Gogoll
Abstract:
Digitalization efforts are rapidly spreading across societies, challenging new and important ethical issues that arise from technological development. Software developers, designers and managerial decision-makers are ever more expected to consider ethical values and conduct normative evaluations when building digital products. Yet, when one looks for guidance in the academic literature one encount…
▽ More
Digitalization efforts are rapidly spreading across societies, challenging new and important ethical issues that arise from technological development. Software developers, designers and managerial decision-makers are ever more expected to consider ethical values and conduct normative evaluations when building digital products. Yet, when one looks for guidance in the academic literature one encounters a plethora of branches of applied ethics. Depending on the context of the system that is to be developed, interesting subfields like big data ethics, machine ethics, information ethics, AI ethics or computer ethics (to only name a few) may present themselves. In this paper we want to offer assistance to any member of a development team by giving a clear and brief introduction into two fields of ethical endeavor (normative ethics and applied ethics), describing how they are related to each other and, finally, provide an ordering of the different branches of applied ethics (big data ethics, machine ethics, information ethics, AI ethics or computer ethics etc.) which have gained traction over the last years. Finally, we discuss an example in the domain of facial recognition software in the domain of medicine to illustrate how this process of normative analysis might be conducted.
△ Less
Submitted 25 March, 2022;
originally announced March 2022.
-
Empowered and Embedded: Ethics and Agile Processes
Authors:
Niina Zuber,
Severin Kacianka,
Jan Gogoll,
Alexander Pretschner,
Julian Nida-Rümelin
Abstract:
In this article we focus on the structural aspects of the development of ethical software, and argue that ethical considerations need to be embedded into the (agile) software development process. In fact, we claim that agile processes of software development lend themselves specifically well for this endeavour. First, we contend that ethical evaluations need to go beyond the use of software produc…
▽ More
In this article we focus on the structural aspects of the development of ethical software, and argue that ethical considerations need to be embedded into the (agile) software development process. In fact, we claim that agile processes of software development lend themselves specifically well for this endeavour. First, we contend that ethical evaluations need to go beyond the use of software products and include an evaluation of the software itself. This implies that software engineers influence peoples' lives through the features of their designed products. Embedded values are thus approached best by software engineers themselves. Therefore, we put emphasis on the possibility to implement ethical deliberations in already existing and well established agile software development processes. Our approach relies on software engineers making their own judgments throughout the entire development process to ensure that technical features and ethical evaluation can be addressed adequately to transport and foster desirable values and norms. We argue that agile software development processes may help the implementation of ethical deliberation for five reasons: 1) agile methods are widely spread, 2) their emphasis on flat hierarchies promotes independent thinking, 3) their reliance on existing team structures serve as an incubator for deliberation, 4) agile development enhances object-focused techno-ethical realism, and, finally, 5) agile structures provide a salient endpoint to deliberation.
△ Less
Submitted 15 July, 2021;
originally announced July 2021.
-
Designing Accountable Systems
Authors:
Severin Kacianka,
Alexander Pretschner
Abstract:
Accountability is an often called for property of technical systems. It is a requirement for algorithmic decision systems, autonomous cyber-physical systems, and for software systems in general. As a concept, accountability goes back to the early history of Liberalism and is suggested as a tool to limit the use of power. This long history has also given us many, often slightly differing, definitio…
▽ More
Accountability is an often called for property of technical systems. It is a requirement for algorithmic decision systems, autonomous cyber-physical systems, and for software systems in general. As a concept, accountability goes back to the early history of Liberalism and is suggested as a tool to limit the use of power. This long history has also given us many, often slightly differing, definitions of accountability. The problem that software developers now face is to understand what accountability means for their systems and how to reflect it in a system's design. To enable the rigorous study of accountability in a system, we need models that are suitable for capturing such a varied concept. In this paper, we present a method to express and compare different definitions of accountability using Structural Causal Models. We show how these models can be used to evaluate a system's design and present a small use case based on an autonomous car.
△ Less
Submitted 20 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
-
Ethics in the Software Development Process: From Codes of Conduct to Ethical Deliberation
Authors:
Jan Gogoll,
Niina Zuber,
Severin Kacianka,
Timo Greger,
Alexander Pretschner,
Julian Nida-Rümelin
Abstract:
Software systems play an ever more important role in our lives and software engineers and their companies find themselves in a position where they are held responsible for ethical issues that may arise. In this paper, we try to disentangle ethical considerations that can be performed at the level of the software engineer from those that belong in the wider domain of business ethics. The handling o…
▽ More
Software systems play an ever more important role in our lives and software engineers and their companies find themselves in a position where they are held responsible for ethical issues that may arise. In this paper, we try to disentangle ethical considerations that can be performed at the level of the software engineer from those that belong in the wider domain of business ethics. The handling of ethical problems that fall into the responsibility of the engineer have traditionally been addressed by the publication of Codes of Ethics and Conduct. We argue that these Codes are barely able to provide normative orientation in software development. The main contribution of this paper is, thus, to analyze the normative features of Codes of Ethics in software engineering and to explicate how their value-based approach might prevent their usefulness from a normative perspective. Codes of Conduct cannot replace ethical deliberation because they do not and cannot offer guidance because of their underdetermined nature. This lack of orientation, we argue, triggers reactive behavior such as "cherry-picking", "risk of indifference", "ex-post orientation" and the "desire to rely on gut feeling". In the light of this, we propose to implement ethical deliberation within software development teams as a way out.
△ Less
Submitted 5 November, 2020;
originally announced November 2020.
-
Expressing Accountability Patterns using Structural Causal Models
Authors:
Severin Kacianka,
Amjad Ibrahim,
Alexander Pretschner
Abstract:
While the exact definition and implementation of accountability depend on the specific context, at its core accountability describes a mechanism that will make decisions transparent and often provides means to sanction "bad" decisions. As such, accountability is specifically relevant for Cyber-Physical Systems, such as robots or drones, that embed themselves into a human society, take decisions an…
▽ More
While the exact definition and implementation of accountability depend on the specific context, at its core accountability describes a mechanism that will make decisions transparent and often provides means to sanction "bad" decisions. As such, accountability is specifically relevant for Cyber-Physical Systems, such as robots or drones, that embed themselves into a human society, take decisions and might cause lasting harm. Without a notion of accountability, such systems could behave with impunity and would not fit into society. Despite its relevance, there is currently no agreement on its meaning and, more importantly, no way to express accountability properties for these systems. As a solution we propose to express the accountability properties of systems using Structural Causal Models. They can be represented as human-readable graphical models while also offering mathematical tools to analyze and reason over them. Our central contribution is to show how Structural Causal Models can be used to express and analyze the accountability properties of systems and that this approach allows us to identify accountability patterns. These accountability patterns can be catalogued and used to improve systems and their architectures.
△ Less
Submitted 15 May, 2020; v1 submitted 7 May, 2020;
originally announced May 2020.
-
Extending Causal Models from Machines into Humans
Authors:
Severin Kacianka,
Amjad Ibrahim,
Alexander Pretschner,
Alexander Trende,
Andreas Lüdtke
Abstract:
Causal Models are increasingly suggested as a means to reason about the behavior of cyber-physical systems in socio-technical contexts. They allow us to analyze courses of events and reason about possible alternatives. Until now, however, such reasoning is confined to the technical domain and limited to single systems or at most groups of systems. The humans that are an integral part of any such s…
▽ More
Causal Models are increasingly suggested as a means to reason about the behavior of cyber-physical systems in socio-technical contexts. They allow us to analyze courses of events and reason about possible alternatives. Until now, however, such reasoning is confined to the technical domain and limited to single systems or at most groups of systems. The humans that are an integral part of any such socio-technical system are usually ignored or dealt with by "expert judgment". We show how a technical causal model can be extended with models of human behavior to cover the complexity and interplay between humans and technical systems. This integrated socio-technical causal model can then be used to reason not only about actions and decisions taken by the machine, but also about those taken by humans interacting with the system. In this paper we demonstrate the feasibility of merging causal models about machines with causal models about humans and illustrate the usefulness of this approach with a highly automated vehicle example.
△ Less
Submitted 30 October, 2019;
originally announced November 2019.
-
A Real-Time Remote IDS Testbed for Connected Vehicles
Authors:
Valentin Zieglmeier,
Severin Kacianka,
Thomas Hutzelmann,
Alexander Pretschner
Abstract:
Connected vehicles are becoming commonplace. A constant connection between vehicles and a central server enables new features and services. This added connectivity raises the likelihood of exposure to attackers and risks unauthorized access. A possible countermeasure to this issue are intrusion detection systems (IDS), which aim at detecting these intrusions during or after their occurrence. The p…
▽ More
Connected vehicles are becoming commonplace. A constant connection between vehicles and a central server enables new features and services. This added connectivity raises the likelihood of exposure to attackers and risks unauthorized access. A possible countermeasure to this issue are intrusion detection systems (IDS), which aim at detecting these intrusions during or after their occurrence. The problem with IDS is the large variety of possible approaches with no sensible option for comparing them. Our contribution to this problem comprises the conceptualization and implementation of a testbed for an automotive real-world scenario. That amounts to a server-side IDS detecting intrusions into vehicles remotely. To verify the validity of our approach, we evaluate the testbed from multiple perspectives, including its fitness for purpose and the quality of the data it generates. Our evaluation shows that the testbed makes the effective assessment of various IDS possible. It solves multiple problems of existing approaches, including class imbalance. Additionally, it enables reproducibility and generating data of varying detection difficulties. This allows for comprehensive evaluation of real-time, remote IDS.
△ Less
Submitted 16 January, 2019; v1 submitted 27 November, 2018;
originally announced November 2018.
-
Understanding and Formalizing Accountability for Cyber-Physical Systems
Authors:
Severin Kacianka,
Alexander Pretschner
Abstract:
Accountability is the property of a system that enables the uncovering of causes for events and helps understand who or what is responsible for these events. Definitions and interpretations of accountability differ; however, they are typically expressed in natural language that obscures design decisions and the impact on the overall system. This paper presents a formal model to express the account…
▽ More
Accountability is the property of a system that enables the uncovering of causes for events and helps understand who or what is responsible for these events. Definitions and interpretations of accountability differ; however, they are typically expressed in natural language that obscures design decisions and the impact on the overall system. This paper presents a formal model to express the accountability properties of cyber-physical systems. To illustrate the usefulness of our approach, we demonstrate how three different interpretations of accountability can be expressed using the proposed model and describe the implementation implications through a case study. This formal model can be used to highlight context specific-elements of accountability mechanisms, define their capabilities, and express different notions of accountability. In addition, it makes design decisions explicit and facilitates discussion, analysis and comparison of different approaches.
△ Less
Submitted 23 October, 2018;
originally announced October 2018.
-
Towards a Unified Model of Accountability Infrastructures
Authors:
Severin Kacianka,
Florian Kelbert,
Alexander Pretschner
Abstract:
Accountability aims to provide explanations for why unwanted situations occurred, thus providing means to assign responsibility and liability. As such, accountability has slightly different meanings across the sciences. In computer science, our focus is on providing explanations for technical systems, in particular if they interact with their physical environment using sensors and actuators and m…
▽ More
Accountability aims to provide explanations for why unwanted situations occurred, thus providing means to assign responsibility and liability. As such, accountability has slightly different meanings across the sciences. In computer science, our focus is on providing explanations for technical systems, in particular if they interact with their physical environment using sensors and actuators and may do serious harm. Accountability is relevant when considering safety, security and privacy properties and we realize that all these incarnations are facets of the same core idea. Hence, in this paper we motivate and propose a model for accountability infrastructures that is expressive enough to capture all of these domains. At its core, this model leverages formal causality models from the literature in order to provide a solid reasoning framework. We show how this model can be instantiated for several real-world use cases.
△ Less
Submitted 28 August, 2016;
originally announced August 2016.
