Research perspectives on Artificial Intelligence, transparency, privacy & law

1. Research perspectives on Artificial Intelligence, transparency, privacy& law Anders Lølandassistant research director co-director NeIC2019

2. amazon.com $106.23

3. Seller 1 = 0.9983 x Seller 2 Seller 2 = 1.270589 x Seller 1

4. amazon.com $23,698,655.93 https://www.wired.com/2011/04/amazon-flies-24-million/

5. AI = a combination ofmyriadsofsuch simple algorithms

6. why AI struggles in the real world – fivekeychallenges #1 games#2 data #3 blackboxes #4 unfair models#5 shortcuts

7. reason #1: the real world is not a game

8. Financial Times, May 24 2018

10. Silver, David, et al. "Mastering chess and shogi by self-play with a general reinforcement learning algorithm." arXiv preprint (2017).

11. 4 hours= 20 million training games

12. 2 hours/game= 1.7 million daysofchess

13. Simple rules

14. Complicatedrules

16. Wewouldneed 20 million drives ½ crash½ successful

17. Simply not possible to simulaterealisticdrives

19. Photo: Bjørn Jarle Kvande

20. keychallenge #1 AI must be more robust

21. reason #2: bad data

22. Simulated sensor data Alarm

23. Errors must be annotated Alarm? Real world sensor data Engine temperature (°C) Missing data Measurementerror?

24. a wholenewfieldis emerging: data engineering

25. keychallenge #2 howcanweensurequality data – and wherecanyou study to be a data engineer?

26. reason#3:artificialintelligenceis a blackbox

27. “Big data is a step forward,” […] “But our problems are not lack of access to data, but understanding them. [Big data] is very useful if I want to find out something without going to the library, but I have to understand it, and that’s the problem.” – Noam Chomsky in 2013 https://www.cnbc.com/2013/11/22/a-brief-history-of-big-data-the-noam-chomsky-way.html

28. AI: a probabilityof 30% thatyouwilldefaultonyourloan

29. AI: loanapplicationdenied

30. you:

31. Zhang, Wu and Zhu (2018) InterpretableCNNs The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

33. major problem: dependent variables can/willcausehavoc

34. whatcanhappenif AI givesyou awrongexplanation?

36. keychallenge #3 open theblackbox to everyone

37. reason#4:artificialintelligence is unfair

38. What is fair?

39. GDPR2016/679 71) […] In order to ensure fair and transparent processing […], the controller should use appropriate mathematical or statistical procedures for the profiling,

40. GDPR2016/679 71) […] and that prevents, inter alia, discriminatory effects on natural persons on the basis of racial or ethnic origin, political opinion, religion or beliefs, […] or that result in measures having such an effect.

41. Courtland: “The bias detectives"Nature, vol. 558 (2018) «high risk»: 2/3 chanceofbeingrearrestedaftertwoyears («predictiveparity»)

42. 3/10 and 2/3 ofhigh risk grouparerearrested 6/10 and 2/3 ofhigh risk grouparerearrested

43. 1/7 = 14 % incorrectlyclassified as high risk 2/4 = 50 % incorrectlyclassified as high risk false positives are more likelyin thisgroup

44. as long as themembersofthetwogroupsarerearrested at different rates, it is difficult to achieve predictiveparity («2/3 ofhigh risk grouprearrested») and equal false-positive rates

45. mathematicallyimpossibleto satisfypredictiveparityand equal false-positive ratesand equal false-negative rates

46. universal fairness is impossible help!

47. COMPAS – CorrectionalOffenderManagement Profiling for Alternative Sanctions Dressel and Farid: "The accuracy, fairness, and limits of predicting recidivism." Science Advances 4.1 (2018)

48. COMPAS: calibrated probabilities Critics: false positives/negatives

49. keychallenge #4 we must agreeonwhat is fair + how to audit AI?

50. reason#5:artificialintelligencefindstheshortestpath