Barroso's seminal contributions in energy-proportional warehouse-scale computing launched an era where modern datacenters have become more energy efficient and cost effective than ever before. At the same time, modern AI applications have driven ever-increasing demands in computing, highlighting the importance of optimizing efficiency across the entire deep learning model development cycle. This paper characterizes the carbon impact of AI, including both operational carbon emissions from training and inference as well as embodied carbon emissions from datacenter construction and hardware manufacturing. We highlight key efficiency optimization opportunities for cutting-edge AI technologies, from deep learning recommendation models to multi-modal generative AI tasks. To scale AI sustainably, we must also go beyond efficiency and optimize across the life cycle of computing infrastructures, from hardware manufacturing to datacenter operations and end-of-life processing for the hardware.

This paper explores the environmental impact of the super-linear growth trends for AI from a holistic perspective, spanning Data, Algorithms, and System Hardware. We characterize the carbon footprint of AI computing by examining the model development cycle across industry-scale machine learning use cases and, at the same time, considering the life cycle of system hardware. Taking a step further, we capture the operational and manufacturing carbon footprint of AI computing and present an end-to-end analysis for what and how hardware-software design and at-scale optimization can help reduce the overall carbon footprint of AI. Based on the industry experience and lessons learned, we share the key challenges and chart out important development directions across the many dimensions of AI. We hope the key messages and insights presented in this paper can inspire the community to advance the field of AI in an environmentally-responsible manner.

We also introduced a taxonomy to The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in navigate the space of explanation methods, not only the ten high stakes domains has been coupled with an increase in societal in the toolkit but also the broader literature on explainable demands for these systems to provide explanations for AI. The taxonomy was intended to be usable by consumers their outputs. This societal demand has already resulted in with varied backgrounds to choose an appropriate explanation new regulations requiring explanations (Goodman and Flaxman method for their application. AIX360 differs from other 2016; Wachter, Mittelstadt, and Floridi 2017; Selbst open source explainability toolkits (see Arya et al. (2020) and Powles 2017; Pasternak 2019). Explanations can allow for a list) in two main ways: 1) its support for a broad and users to gain insight into the system's decision-making process, diverse spectrum of explainability methods, implemented in which is a key component in calibrating appropriate a common architecture, and 2) its educational material as trust and confidence in AI systems (Doshi-Velez and Kim discussed below.

As artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms make further inroads into society, calls are increasing from multiple stakeholders for these algorithms to explain their outputs. At the same time, these stakeholders, whether they be affected citizens, government regulators, domain experts, or system developers, present different requirements for explanations. Toward addressing these needs, we introduce AI Explainability 360 (http://aix360.mybluemix.net/), an open-source software toolkit featuring eight diverse and state-of-the-art explainability methods and two evaluation metrics. Equally important, we provide a taxonomy to help entities requiring explanations to navigate the space of explanation methods, not only those in the toolkit but also in the broader literature on explainability. For data scientists and other users of the toolkit, we have implemented an extensible software architecture that organizes methods according to their place in the AI modeling pipeline. We also discuss enhancements to bring research innovations closer to consumers of explanations, ranging from simplified, more accessible versions of algorithms, to tutorials and an interactive web demo to introduce AI explainability to different audiences and application domains. Together, our toolkit and taxonomy can help identify gaps where more explainability methods are needed and provide a platform to incorporate them as they are developed.