safety component
Being Accountable is Smart: Navigating the Technical and Regulatory Landscape of AI-based Services for Power Grid
Volkova, Anna, Hatamian, Mahdieh, Anapyanova, Alina, de Meer, Hermann
The emergence of artificial intelligence and digitization of the power grid introduced numerous effective application scenarios for AI-based services for the smart grid. Nevertheless, adopting AI in critical infrastructures presents challenges due to unclear regulations and lacking risk quantification techniques. Regulated and accountable approaches for integrating AI-based services into the smart grid could accelerate the adoption of innovative methods in daily practices and address society's general safety concerns. This paper contributes to this objective by defining accountability and highlighting its importance for AI-based services in the energy sector. It underlines the current shortcomings of the AI Act and proposes an approach to address these issues in a potential delegated act. The proposed technical approach for developing and operating accountable AI-based smart grid services allows for assessing different service life cycle phases and identifying related accountability risks.
Use case cards: a use case reporting framework inspired by the European AI Act
Hupont, Isabelle, Fernรกndez-Llorca, David, Baldassarri, Sandra, Gรณmez, Emilia
Despite recent efforts by the Artificial Intelligence (AI) community to move towards standardised procedures for documenting models, methods, systems or datasets, there is currently no methodology focused on use cases aligned with the risk-based approach of the European AI Act (AI Act). In this paper, we propose a new framework for the documentation of use cases, that we call "use case cards", based on the use case modelling included in the Unified Markup Language (UML) standard. Unlike other documentation methodologies, we focus on the intended purpose and operational use of an AI system. It consists of two main parts. Firstly, a UML-based template, tailored to allow implicitly assessing the risk level of the AI system and defining relevant requirements. Secondly, a supporting UML diagram designed to provide information about the system-user interactions and relationships. The proposed framework is the result of a co-design process involving a relevant team of EU policy experts and scientists. We have validated our proposal with 11 experts with different backgrounds and a reasonable knowledge of the AI Act as a prerequisite. We provide the 5 "use case cards" used in the co-design and validation process. "Use case cards" allows framing and contextualising use cases in an effective way, and we hope this methodology can be a useful tool for policy makers and providers for documenting use cases, assessing the risk level, adapting the different requirements and building a catalogue of existing usages of AI.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says Elon Musk-backed letter calling for AI pause wasn't 'optimal way to address it'
Twitter and Tesla CEO Elon Musk weighs in on the dangers of artificial intelligence, the future of Twitter and more in an exclusive'Tucker Carlson Tonight' interview. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says that a letter signed by Twitter CEO Elon Musk and others in the technology community calling for a pause on "giant AI experiments" wasn't the right way to address the issue. Musk, Steve Wozniak, and other tech leaders signed the letter in March, which asked AI developers to "immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4." During a virtual appearance at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on Thursday, Altman addressed the letter. "There's parts of the thrust that I really agree with," Altman said, adding that his team spent more than six months after completing the training of ChatGPT 4 to study safety components before it was released.
Quantitative study about the estimated impact of the AI Act
Hauer, Marc P., Krafft, Tobias D, Sesing-Wagenpfeil, Dr. Andreas, Zweig, Prof. Katharina
With the Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonised rules on Artificial Intelligence (AI Act) the European Union provides the first regulatory document that applies to the entire complex of AI systems. While some fear that the regulation leaves too much room for interpretation and thus bring little benefit to society, others expect that the regulation is too restrictive and, thus, blocks progress and innovation, as well as hinders the economic success of companies within the EU. Without a systematic approach, it is difficult to assess how it will actually impact the AI landscape. In this paper, we suggest a systematic approach that we applied on the initial draft of the AI Act that has been released in April 2021. We went through several iterations of compiling the list of AI products and projects in and from Germany, which the Lernende Systeme platform lists, and then classified them according to the AI Act together with experts from the fields of computer science and law. Our study shows a need for more concrete formulation, since for some provisions it is often unclear whether they are applicable in a specific case or not. Apart from that, it turns out that only about 30\% of the AI systems considered would be regulated by the AI Act, the rest would be classified as low-risk. However, as the database is not representative, the results only provide a first assessment. The process presented can be applied to any collections, and also repeated when regulations are about to change. This allows fears of over- or under-regulation to be investigated before the regulations comes into effect.
The EU's proposed AI laws would regulate robot surgeons but not the military
While US lawmakers muddle through yet another congressional hearing on the dangers posed by algorithmic bias in social media, the European Commission (basically the executive branch of the EU) has unveiled a sweeping regulatory framework that, if adopted, could have global implications for the future of AI development. After extensive meetings with advocate groups and other stakeholders, the EC released both the first European Strategy on AI and Coordinated Plan on AI in 2018. Those were followed in 2019 by the Guidelines for Trustworthy AI, then again in 2020 by the Commission's White Paper on AI and Report on the safety and liability implications of Artificial Intelligence, the Internet of Things and robotics. Just as with its ambitious General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) plan in 2018, the Commission is seeking to establish a basic level of public trust in the technology based on strident user and data privacy protections as well as those against its potential misuse. "Artificial intelligence should not be an end in itself, but a tool that has to serve people with the ultimate aim of increasing human well-being. Rules for artificial intelligence available in the Union market or otherwise affecting Union citizens should thus put people at the centre (be human-centric), so that they can trust that the technology is used in a way that is safe and compliant with the law, including the respect of fundamental rights," the Commission included in its draft regulations.