arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2302.03080cs.LGcs.CY
收藏

算法透明性和可解释性在政策中的五种用途

Five policy uses of algorithmic transparency and explainability

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace(卡内基国际和平基金会)

Matthew O'Shaughnessy

AI总结:

本文通过案例研究展示了算法透明性和可解释性在政策中的五种用途,探讨了政策期望与机器学习技术的差异,并为研究人员和政策制定者提出了建议。

摘要:

算法系统应当是“透明的”和“可解释的”这一理念,在政府、公司和倡导组织制定的众多共识原则声明中十分常见。但是,政策和法律行为者究竟希望从这些技术概念中获得什么,他们的期望与机器学习文献中开发的可解释性技术相比又如何?为了更好地连接政策与技术社区,我们提供了案例研究,说明算法透明性和可解释性在政策环境中的五种使用方式:对解释的具体要求;用于算法内部治理的非约束性指南;适用于高度监管环境的法规;旨在提高算法法律责任的实用性的指南;以及对模型和数据透明性的广泛要求。这些案例研究涵盖了从对特定类型解释的精确要求到关注更广泛透明性概念的非特定要求的光谱,说明了各种政策参与者和环境的多样化需求、约束和能力。基于这些案例研究,我们讨论了透明性和解释在政策中应用的有前景的方式,以及限制政策制定者使用算法可解释性的常见因素。最后,我们为研究人员和政策制定者提出了建议。

英文摘要:

The notion that algorithmic systems should be "transparent" and "explainable" is common in the many statements of consensus principles developed by governments, companies, and advocacy organizations. But what exactly do policy and legal actors want from these technical concepts, and how do their desiderata compare with the explainability techniques developed in the machine learning literature? In hopes of better connecting the policy and technical communities, we provide case studies illustrating five ways in which algorithmic transparency and explainability have been used in policy settings: specific requirements for explanations; in nonbinding guidelines for internal governance of algorithms; in regulations applicable to highly regulated settings; in guidelines meant to increase the utility of legal liability for algorithms; and broad requirements for model and data transparency. The case studies span a spectrum from precise requirements for specific types of explanations to nonspecific requirements focused on broader notions of transparency, illustrating the diverse needs, constraints, and capacities of various policy actors and contexts. Drawing on these case studies, we discuss promising ways in which transparency and explanation could be used in policy, as well as common factors limiting policymakers' use of algorithmic explainability. We conclude with recommendations for researchers and policymakers.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑