Quality Assurance for AI: An Inevitable Tradeoff
Similar Posts
Black Box Approach to AI Governance
As currently drafted (2024), the Algorithmic Accountability Act does not require the algorithms and training data used in an AI System to be available for audit. (See my notes on the Act, starting with the one here.) The way that an auditor learns about the AI System is from documented impact assessments, which involve descriptions…
When (if ever) Is a Claim Objective?
“Objective”, as in, for example, “what I’m saying is objective”, or “that statement is objective”, or “we need objective criteria when making these decisions”, is a complicated term. It takes a lot of effort to make sure it is understood as intended (or closely enough). It is therefore a costly word to use. Why is…
AI Growth through Expert Communities
In the creator economy, the creative individual sells content. The more attention the content captures, the more valuable it is. The incentive for the creator is status and payment for consumption of their content. Distribution channels are Internet platforms, where content is delivered as intended by the author, the platform does not transform it (other…
What is AI Governance for?
If an AI is not predictable by design, then the purpose of governing it is to ensure that it gives the right answers (actions) most of the time, and that when it fails, the consequences are negligible, or that it can only fail on inconsequential questions, goals, or tasks.
Opaque, Complex, Biased, and Unpredictable AI
Opacity, complexity, bias, and unpredictability are key negative nonfunctional requirements to address when designing AI systems. Negative means that if you have a design that reduces opacity, for example, relative to another design, the former is preferred, all else being equal. The first thing is to understand what each term refers to in general, that…