Safe and Ethical AI (SEA) Platform Network · Linking Artificial Intelligence Principles (LAIP)

1. Purpose

The purpose of AI and cognitive systems developed and applied by the IBM company is to augment human intelligence. Our technology, products, services and policies will be designed to enhance and extend human capability, expertise and potential. Our position is based not only on principle but also on science. Cognitive systems will not realistically attain consciousness or independent agency. Rather, they will increasingly be embedded in the processes, systems, products and services by which business and society function – all of which will and should remain within human control.

Principle: Principles for the Cognitive Era, Jan 17, 2017

Published by IBM

Related Principles

· 6. Respect for (& Enhancement of) Human Autonomy

AI systems should be designed not only to uphold rights, values and principles, but also to protect citizens in all their diversity from governmental and private abuses made possible by AI technology, ensuring a fair distribution of the benefits created by AI technologies, protect and enhance a plurality of human values, and enhance self determination and autonomy of individual users and communities. AI products and services, possibly through "extreme" personalisation approaches, may steer individual choice by potentially manipulative "nudging". At the same time, people are increasingly willing and expected to delegate decisions and actions to machines (e.g. recommender systems, search engines, navigation systems, virtual coaches and personal assistants). Systems that are tasked to help the user, must provide explicit support to the user to promote her his own preferences, and set the limits for system intervention, ensuring that the overall wellbeing of the user as explicitly defined by the user her himself is central to system functionality.

Published by The European Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence in Draft Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI, Dec 18, 2018

2. Transparency

For cognitive systems to fulfill their world changing potential, it is vital that people have confidence in their recommendations, judgments and uses. Therefore, the IBM company will make clear: When and for what purposes AI is being applied in the cognitive solutions we develop and deploy. The major sources of data and expertise that inform the insights of cognitive solutions, as well as the methods used to train those systems and solutions. The principle that clients own their own business models and intellectual property and that they can use AI and cognitive systems to enhance the advantages they have built, often through years of experience. We will work with our clients to protect their data and insights, and will encourage our clients, partners and industry colleagues to adopt similar practices.

Published by IBM in Principles for the Cognitive Era, Jan 17, 2017

1. The purpose of AI is to augment human intelligence

The purpose of AI and cognitive systems developed and applied by IBM is to augment – not replace – human intelligence. Our technology is and will be designed to enhance and extend human capability and potential. At IBM, we believe AI should make ALL of us better at our jobs, and that the benefits of the AI era should touch the many, not just the elite few. To that end, we are investing in initiatives to help the global workforce gain the skills needed to work in partnership with these technologies.

Published by IBM in Principles for Trust and Transparency, May 30, 2018

Third principle: Understanding

AI enabled systems, and their outputs, must be appropriately understood by relevant individuals, with mechanisms to enable this understanding made an explicit part of system design. Effective and ethical decision making in Defence, from the frontline of combat to back office operations, is always underpinned by appropriate understanding of context by those making decisions. Defence personnel must have an appropriate, context specific understanding of the AI enabled systems they operate and work alongside. This level of understanding will naturally differ depending on the knowledge required to act ethically in a given role and with a given system. It may include an understanding of the general characteristics, benefits and limitations of AI systems. It may require knowledge of a system’s purposes and correct environment for use, including scenarios where a system should not be deployed or used. It may also demand an understanding of system performance and potential fail states. Our people must be suitably trained and competent to operate or understand these tools. To enable this understanding, we must be able to verify that our AI enabled systems work as intended. While the ‘black box’ nature of some machine learning systems means that they are difficult to fully explain, we must be able to audit either the systems or their outputs to a level that satisfies those who are duly and formally responsible and accountable. Mechanisms to interpret and understand our systems must be a crucial and explicit part of system design across the entire lifecycle. This requirement for context specific understanding based on technically understandable systems must also reach beyond the MOD, to commercial suppliers, allied forces and civilians. Whilst absolute transparency as to the workings of each AI enabled system is neither desirable nor practicable, public consent and collaboration depend on context specific shared understanding. What our systems do, how we intend to use them, and our processes for ensuring beneficial outcomes result from their use should be as transparent as possible, within the necessary constraints of the national security context.

Published by The Ministry of Defence (MOD), United Kingdom in Ethical Principles for AI in Defence, Jun 15, 2022

6 Promote artificial intelligence that is responsive and sustainable

Responsiveness requires that designers, developers and users continuously, systematically and transparently examine an AI technology to determine whether it is responding adequately, appropriately and according to communicated expectations and requirements in the context in which it is used. Thus, identification of a health need requires that institutions and governments respond to that need and its context with appropriate technologies with the aim of achieving the public interest in health protection and promotion. When an AI technology is ineffective or engenders dissatisfaction, the duty to be responsive requires an institutional process to resolve the problem, which may include terminating use of the technology. Responsiveness also requires that AI technologies be consistent with wider efforts to promote health systems and environmental and workplace sustainability. AI technologies should be introduced only if they can be fully integrated and sustained in the health care system. Too often, especially in under resourced health systems, new technologies are not used or are not repaired or updated, thereby wasting scare resources that could have been invested in proven interventions. Furthermore, AI systems should be designed to minimize their ecological footprints and increase energy efficiency, so that use of AI is consistent with society’s efforts to reduce the impact of human beings on the earth’s environment, ecosystems and climate. Sustainability also requires governments and companies to address anticipated disruptions to the workplace, including training of health care workers to adapt to use of AI and potential job losses due to the use of automated systems for routine health care functions and administrative tasks.

Published by World Health Organization (WHO) in Key ethical principles for use of artificial intelligence for health, Jun 28, 2021