Journal Home Online First Current Issue Archive For Authors Journal Information 中文版

Engineering >> 2020, Volume 6, Issue 3 doi: 10.1016/j.eng.2019.12.015

Ethical Principles and Governance Technology Development of AI in China

a State Key Laboratory of Software Development Environment, Beihang University, Beijing 100191, China
b School of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
c Chinese Institute of New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Strategie, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China

Received: 2019-09-19 Revised: 2019-11-18 Accepted: 2019-12-25

Next Previous

Abstract

Ethics and governance are vital to the healthy and sustainable development of artificial intelligence (AI). With the long-term goal of keeping AI beneficial to human society, governments, research organizations, and companies in China have published ethical guidelines and principles for AI, and have launched projects to develop AI governance technologies. This paper presents a survey of these efforts and highlights the preliminary outcomes in China. It also describes the major research challenges in AI governance research and discusses future research directions.

Figures

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

References

[ 1 ] National Governance Committee for the New Generation Artificial Intelligence. Governance principles for the new generation artificial intelligence— developing responsible artificial intelligence [Internet]. Beijing: China Daily; c1995–2019 [updated 2019 Jun 17; cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201906/17/WS5d07486ba3103dbf14328ab7. html?from=timeline&isappinstalled=0. link1

[ 2 ] Beijing AI principles [Internet]. Beijing: Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence; c2019 [updated 2019 May 28; cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: https://www.baai.ac.cn/blog/beijing-ai-principles. link1

[ 3 ] Zeng Y, Lu E, Huangfu C. Linking artificial intelligence principles. 2018. arXiv:1812.04814.

[ 4 ] Yang Q, Liu Y, Chen T, Tong Y. Federated machine learning: concept and applications. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol 2019;10(2):12. link1

[ 5 ] Guide for architectural framework and application of federated machine learning [Internet]. New York: IEEE P3652.1 Federated Machine Learning Working Group; c2019 [cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: https://sagroups. ieee.org/3652-1/. link1

[ 6 ] Xiao C, Li B, Zhu J, He W, Liu M, Song D. Generating adversarial examples with adversarial networks. 2018. arXiv:1801.02610.

[ 7 ] Liu A, Liu X, Fan J, Ma Y, Zhang A, Xie H, et al. Perceptual-sensitive GAN for generating adversarial patches. In: Proceedings of the 33rd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence; 2019 Jan 27–Feb 1; Honolulu, HI, USA; 2019.

[ 8 ] Yan Z, Guo Y, Zhang C. Deep defense: training DNNs with improved adversarial robustness. 2018. arXiv:1803.00404v3.

[ 9 ] Pang T, Du C, Dong Y, Zhu J. Towards robust detection of adversarial examples. 2018. arXiv:1706.00633v4.

[10] Ling X, Ji S, Zou J, Wang J, Wu C, Li B, et al. DEEPSEC: a uniform platform for security analysis of deep learning model. In: Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy; 2019 May 20–22; San Francisco, CA, USA; 2019.

[11] Pulina L, Tacchella A. Challenging SMT solvers to verify neural networks. AI Commun 2012;25(2):117–35. link1

[12] Katz G, Barrett C, Dill DL, Julian K, Kochenderfer MJ. Reluplex: an efficient SMT solver for verifying deep neural networks. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Aided Verification; 2017 Jul 24–28; Heidelberg, Germany; 2017. p. 97–117.

[13] Gehr T, Mirman M, Drachsler-Cohen D, Tsankov P, Chaudhuri S, Vechev M. AI2: safety and robustness certification of neural networks with abstract interpretation. In: Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy; 2018 May 20–24; San Francisco, CA, USA; 2018.

[14] Singh G, Gehr T, Mirman M, Püschel M, Vechev M. Fast and effective robustness certification. In: Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 31; 2018 Dec 3–8; Montreal, QC, Canada; 2018. p. 10802–13.

[15] Lin W, Yang Z, Chen X, Zhao Q, Li X, Liu Z, et al. Robustness verification of classification deep neural networks via linear programming. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 2019 Jun 16–20; Long Beach, CA, USA; 2019. p. 11418–27.

[16] Yang P, Liu J, Li J, Chen L, Huang X. Analyzing deep neural networks with symbolic propagation: towards higher precision and faster verification. 2019. arXiv:1902.09866.

[17] Ribeiro MT, Singh S, Guestrin C. ‘‘Why should I trust you?”: explaining the predictions of any classifier. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining; 2016 Aug 13–17; San Francisco, CA, USA; 2016. p. 1135–44.

[18] Zhang Q, Yang Y, Ma H, Wu YN. Interpreting CNNs via decision trees. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 2019 Jun 16–20; Long Beach, CA, USA; 2019. p. 6261–70.

[19] Liu S, Wang X, Liu M, Zhu J. Towards better analysis of machine learning models: a visual analytics perspective. Visual Inf 2017;1(1):48–56. link1

[20] Ma S, Aafer Y, Xu Z, Lee WC, Zhai J, Liu Y, et al. LAMP: data provenance for graph based machine learning algorithms through derivative computation. In: Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering; 2017 Sept 4–8; Paderborn, Germany; 2017. p. 786–97.

[21] Xuan X, Peng B, Dong J, Wang W. On the generalization of GAN image forensics. 2019. arXiv:1902.11153.

[22] Gajane P, Pechenizkiy M. On formalizing fairness in prediction with machine learning. 2017. arXIv:1710.03184.

[23] Kusner MJ, Loftus J, Russell C, Silva R. Counterfactual fairness. 2017. arXiv:1703.06856.

[24] Bolukbasi T, Chang KW, Zou J, Saligrama V, Kalai A. Man is to computer programmer as woman is to homemaker? Debiasing word embeddings. 2016. arXiv:1607.06520.

[25] Weng P. Fairness in reinforcement learning. 2019. arXiv:1907.10323.

[26] Bellamy RKE, Dey K, Hind M, Hoffman SC, Houde S, Kannan K, et al. AI fairness 360: an extensible toolkit for detecting, understanding, and mitigating unwanted algorithmic bias. 2018. arXiv:1810.01943.

[27] High-Level Expert Group on AI. Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI [Internet]. Brussels: European Commission; 2019 Apr 8 [cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/ethics-guidelinestrustworthy-ai. link1

[28] Trump DJ. Executive order on maintaining American leadership in artificial intelligence [Internet]. Washington, DC: The White House; 2019 Feb 11 [cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/ presidential-actions/executive-order-maintaining-american-leadership-artificialintelligence/. link1

[29] Tencent AI Lab. Technological ethics at intelligent era—reshape trustworthiness in digital society [Internet]. Beijing: Tencent Research Institute; 2019 Jul 8 [cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: https://tisi.org/ 10890. Chinese. link1

[30] Meet the Partners [Internet]. San Francisco: Partnership on AI; c2016–18 [cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: https://www.partnershiponai. org/partners/. link1

[31] Li Q, Wen Z, Wu Z, Hu S, Wang N, He B. Federated learning systems: vision, hype and reality for data privacy and protection. 2019. arXiv:1907.09693.

[32] Szegedy C, Zaremba W, Sutskever I, Bruna J, Erhan D, Goodfellow I, et al. Intriguing properties of neural networks. 2013. arXiv:1312.6199.

[33] Kurakin A, Goodfellow I, Bengio S, Dong Y, Liao F, Liang M. Adversarial attacks and defences competition. In: Escalera S, Weimer M, editors. The NIPS’17 competition: building intelligent systems. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 195–231. link1

[34] Cao Y, Xiao C, Yang D, Fang J, Yang R, Liu M, et al. Adversarial objects against LiDAR-based autonomous driving systems. 2019. arXiv:1907.05418.

[35] Arya V, Bellamy RK, Chen PY, Dhurandhar A, Hind M, Hoffman SC, et al. One explanation does not fit all: a toolkit and taxonomy of AI explainability techniques. 2019. arXiv:1909.03012.

[36] Yu H, Shen Z, Miao C, Leung C, Lesser VR, Yang Q. Building ethics into artificial intelligence. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence; 2018 Jul 13–19; Stockholm, Sweden; 2018. p. 5527–33. link1

[37] Everitt T, Kumar R, Krakovna V, Legg S. Modeling AGI safety frameworks with causal influence diagrams. 2019. arXiv:1906.08663.

[38] Awad E, Dsouza S, Kim R, Schulz J, Henrich J, Shariff A, et al. The moral machine experiment. Nature 2018;563(7729):59–64. link1

[39] Conitzer V, Sinnott-Armstrong W, Borg JS, Deng Y, Kramer M. Moral decision making frameworks for artificial intelligence. In: Proceedings of the 31st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence; 2017 Feb 4–10; San Francisco, CA, USA; 2017. p. 4831–5.

[40] Kim R, Kleiman-Weiner M, Abeliuk A, Awad E, Dsouza S, Tenenbaum JB, et al. A computational model of commonsense moral decision making. In: Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society; 2018 Feb 2–3; New Orleans, LA, USA; 2018. p. 197–203.

[41] National Artificial Intelligence Standardization Steering Committee. Report on artificial intelligence ethical risk analysis [Internet]. [cited 2019 Dec 18]. Available from: http://www.cesi.ac.cn/images/editor/20190425/ 20190425142632634001.pdf. Chinese. link1

[42] Crawford K, Calo R. There is a blind spot in AI research. Nature 2016;538 (7625):311–3. link1

Related Research