Showing 1–5 of 5 results for author: McCroskery, A

The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants

Authors: Iason Gabriel, Arianna Manzini, Geoff Keeling, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Verena Rieser, Hasan Iqbal, Nenad Tomašev, Ira Ktena, Zachary Kenton, Mikel Rodriguez, Seliem El-Sayed, Sasha Brown, Canfer Akbulut, Andrew Trask, Edward Hughes, A. Stevie Bergman, Renee Shelby, Nahema Marchal, Conor Griffin, Juan Mateos-Garcia, Laura Weidinger, Winnie Street, Benjamin Lange, Alex Ingerman, Alison Lentz , et al. (32 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, pro… ▽ More This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, providing an overview of AI assistants, their technical foundations and potential range of applications. It then explores questions around AI value alignment, well-being, safety and malicious uses. Extending the circle of inquiry further, we next consider the relationship between advanced AI assistants and individual users in more detail, exploring topics such as manipulation and persuasion, anthropomorphism, appropriate relationships, trust and privacy. With this analysis in place, we consider the deployment of advanced assistants at a societal scale, focusing on cooperation, equity and access, misinformation, economic impact, the environment and how best to evaluate advanced AI assistants. Finally, we conclude by providing a range of recommendations for researchers, developers, policymakers and public stakeholders. △ Less

Submitted 28 April, 2024; v1 submitted 24 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

A Mechanism-Based Approach to Mitigating Harms from Persuasive Generative AI

Authors: Seliem El-Sayed, Canfer Akbulut, Amanda McCroskery, Geoff Keeling, Zachary Kenton, Zaria Jalan, Nahema Marchal, Arianna Manzini, Toby Shevlane, Shannon Vallor, Daniel Susser, Matija Franklin, Sophie Bridgers, Harry Law, Matthew Rahtz, Murray Shanahan, Michael Henry Tessler, Arthur Douillard, Tom Everitt, Sasha Brown

Abstract: Recent generative AI systems have demonstrated more advanced persuasive capabilities and are increasingly permeating areas of life where they can influence decision-making. Generative AI presents a new risk profile of persuasion due the opportunity for reciprocal exchange and prolonged interactions. This has led to growing concerns about harms from AI persuasion and how they can be mitigated, high… ▽ More Recent generative AI systems have demonstrated more advanced persuasive capabilities and are increasingly permeating areas of life where they can influence decision-making. Generative AI presents a new risk profile of persuasion due the opportunity for reciprocal exchange and prolonged interactions. This has led to growing concerns about harms from AI persuasion and how they can be mitigated, highlighting the need for a systematic study of AI persuasion. The current definitions of AI persuasion are unclear and related harms are insufficiently studied. Existing harm mitigation approaches prioritise harms from the outcome of persuasion over harms from the process of persuasion. In this paper, we lay the groundwork for the systematic study of AI persuasion. We first put forward definitions of persuasive generative AI. We distinguish between rationally persuasive generative AI, which relies on providing relevant facts, sound reasoning, or other forms of trustworthy evidence, and manipulative generative AI, which relies on taking advantage of cognitive biases and heuristics or misrepresenting information. We also put forward a map of harms from AI persuasion, including definitions and examples of economic, physical, environmental, psychological, sociocultural, political, privacy, and autonomy harm. We then introduce a map of mechanisms that contribute to harmful persuasion. Lastly, we provide an overview of approaches that can be used to mitigate against process harms of persuasion, including prompt engineering for manipulation classification and red teaming. Future work will operationalise these mitigations and study the interaction between different types of mechanisms of persuasion. △ Less

Submitted 23 April, 2024; originally announced April 2024.

Should agentic conversational AI change how we think about ethics? Characterising an interactional ethics centred on respect

Authors: Lize Alberts, Geoff Keeling, Amanda McCroskery

Abstract: With the growing popularity of conversational agents based on large language models (LLMs), we need to ensure their behaviour is ethical and appropriate. Work in this area largely centres around the 'HHH' criteria: making outputs more helpful and honest, and avoiding harmful (biased, toxic, or inaccurate) statements. Whilst this semantic focus is useful when viewing LLM agents as mere mediums or o… ▽ More With the growing popularity of conversational agents based on large language models (LLMs), we need to ensure their behaviour is ethical and appropriate. Work in this area largely centres around the 'HHH' criteria: making outputs more helpful and honest, and avoiding harmful (biased, toxic, or inaccurate) statements. Whilst this semantic focus is useful when viewing LLM agents as mere mediums or output-generating systems, it fails to account for pragmatic factors that can make the same speech act seem more or less tactless or inconsiderate in different social situations. With the push towards agentic AI, wherein systems become increasingly proactive in chasing goals and performing actions in the world, considering the pragmatics of interaction becomes essential. We propose an interactional approach to ethics that is centred on relational and situational factors. We explore what it means for a system, as a social actor, to treat an individual respectfully in a (series of) interaction(s). Our work anticipates a set of largely unexplored risks at the level of situated social interaction, and offers practical suggestions to help agentic LLM technologies treat people well. △ Less

Submitted 16 May, 2024; v1 submitted 17 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

MSC Class: 68T42 ACM Class: H.5.2; I.2; I.2.1; J.4; J.5

Engaging Engineering Teams Through Moral Imagination: A Bottom-Up Approach for Responsible Innovation and Ethical Culture Change in Technology Companies

Authors: Benjamin Lange, Geoff Keeling, Amanda McCroskery, Ben Zevenbergen, Sandra Blascovich, Kyle Pedersen, Alison Lentz, Blaise Aguera y Arcas

Abstract: We propose a "Moral Imagination" methodology to facilitate a culture of responsible innovation for engineering and product teams in technology companies. Our approach has been operationalized over the past two years at Google, where we have conducted over 50 workshops with teams across the organization. We argue that our approach is a crucial complement to existing formal and informal initiatives… ▽ More We propose a "Moral Imagination" methodology to facilitate a culture of responsible innovation for engineering and product teams in technology companies. Our approach has been operationalized over the past two years at Google, where we have conducted over 50 workshops with teams across the organization. We argue that our approach is a crucial complement to existing formal and informal initiatives for fostering a culture of ethical awareness, deliberation, and decision-making in technology design such as company principles, ethics and privacy review procedures, and compliance controls. We characterize some of the distinctive benefits of our methodology for the technology sector in particular. △ Less

Submitted 28 October, 2023; v1 submitted 12 June, 2023; originally announced June 2023.

Comments: 16 pages, 1 figure

Redefining Relationships in Music

Authors: Christian Detweiler, Beth Coleman, Fernando Diaz, Lieke Dom, Chris Donahue, Jesse Engel, Cheng-Zhi Anna Huang, Larry James, Ethan Manilow, Amanda McCroskery, Kyle Pedersen, Pamela Peter-Agbia, Negar Rostamzadeh, Robert Thomas, Marco Zamarato, Ben Zevenbergen

Abstract: AI tools increasingly shape how we discover, make and experience music. While these tools can have the potential to empower creativity, they may fundamentally redefine relationships between stakeholders, to the benefit of some and the detriment of others. In this position paper, we argue that these tools will fundamentally reshape our music culture, with profound effects (for better and for worse)… ▽ More AI tools increasingly shape how we discover, make and experience music. While these tools can have the potential to empower creativity, they may fundamentally redefine relationships between stakeholders, to the benefit of some and the detriment of others. In this position paper, we argue that these tools will fundamentally reshape our music culture, with profound effects (for better and for worse) on creators, consumers and the commercial enterprises that often connect them. By paying careful attention to emerging Music AI technologies and developments in other creative domains and understanding the implications, people working in this space could decrease the possible negative impacts on the practice, consumption and meaning of music. Given that many of these technologies are already available, there is some urgency in conducting analyses of these technologies now. It is important that people develo** and working with these tools address these issues now to help guide their evolution to be equitable and empower creativity. We identify some potential risks and opportunities associated with existing and forthcoming AI tools for music, though more work is needed to identify concrete actions which leverage the opportunities while mitigating risks. △ Less

Submitted 16 December, 2022; v1 submitted 13 December, 2022; originally announced December 2022.

Comments: Presented at Cultures in AI/AI in Culture workshop at NeurIPS 2022