Artificial Intelligence: An Accountability Framework for Federal Agencies and Other Entities
With AI and Automated Systems Rapidly Developing, a Focus on Equity Can Maximize Benefits for All Urban Institute
Similarly, public sector’s reliance on voluntary best practices and self-regulation fares well, as long as no misdemeanor is found on the side of data processors – as exemplified by the public outrage and calls for regulation of Internet platforms that have continuously ignored its self-imposed standards. Introducing new resource-intensive processes inside the public sector – especially if they require reskilling and a lot of taxpayer dollars – enters the logic of path-dependency – it is much harder to abandon a flagship and politically salient project that has promised to “revolutionize” a given sector. The treaty could include provisions on transparency, safety, privacy, and accountability.
For each principle, the framework describes key practices for federal agencies and other entities that are considering, selecting, and implementing AI systems. Each practice includes a set of questions for entities, auditors, and third-party assessors to consider, as well as procedures for auditors and third- party assessors. Although the adoption of AI by federal government is growing—a February 2020 report found that nearly half of the 142 federal agencies studied had “experimented with AI and related machine learning tools”—many of the AI tools procured by government agencies have proven to be deeply flawed.
EPIC Comments on FTC Solicitation for Comments on Business Practices of Cloud Computing Providers
As AI creates new jobs and industries, all workers need a seat at the table, including through collective bargaining, to ensure that they benefit from these opportunities. My Administration will seek to adapt job training and education to support a diverse workforce and help provide access to opportunities that AI creates. In the workplace itself, AI should not be deployed in ways that undermine rights, worsen job quality, encourage undue worker surveillance, lessen market competition, introduce new health and safety risks, or cause harmful labor-force disruptions. The critical next steps in AI development should be built on the views of workers, labor unions, educators, and employers to support responsible uses of AI that improve workers’ lives, positively augment human work, and help all people safely enjoy the gains and opportunities from technological innovation. Meeting this goal requires robust, reliable, repeatable, and standardized evaluations of AI systems, as well as policies, institutions, and, as appropriate, other mechanisms to test, understand, and mitigate risks from these systems before they are put to use. It also requires addressing AI systems’ most pressing security risks — including with respect to biotechnology, cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, and other national security dangers — while navigating AI’s opacity and complexity.
My Administration cannot — and will not — tolerate the use of AI to disadvantage those who are already too often denied equal opportunity and justice. From hiring to housing to healthcare, we have seen what happens when AI use deepens discrimination and bias, rather than improving quality of life. Artificial Intelligence systems deployed irresponsibly have reproduced and intensified existing inequities, caused new types of harmful discrimination, and exacerbated online and physical harms. It is necessary to hold those developing and deploying AI accountable to standards that protect against unlawful discrimination and abuse, including in the justice system and the Federal Government.
Cities, towns, and villages can harness the power of AI to draft resolutions, create social media content, summarize information for constituents, improve data-driven decision-making, and more. However, not all municipal applications are suitable for AI, and not all AI technologies are appropriate for government use. In considering this guidance, the Attorney General shall consult with State, local, Tribal, and territorial law enforcement agencies, as appropriate. (iii) Determine the set of technical conditions for a large AI model to have potential capabilities that could be used in malicious cyber-enabled activity, and revise that determination as necessary and appropriate. Despite these challenges, I believe that the potential benefits of AI for local governments outweigh the risks.
Use AI to optimize service recommendations and enhance customer engagement, improving both the speed and quality of service delivery while transforming the employee work experience and reducing workloads. Getting there, however, requires government agencies to focus on the main areas where AI use cases can benefit their agencies, and its customers the most. For instance, an AI crowdsourcing tool developed by a Belgian technology company CitizenLab was used by Belgian authorities to understand public demands during climate change protests in 2019. As a result, Belgium was able to define 15 climate action priority policies that were curated via public opinion. Likewise, the government of Dubai uses an AI assistant RAMMAS that guides citizens regarding bill payment, application tracking, and job applications.
On a larger scale, some policy wonks place their hope in the European Parliament’s AI Act, which puts public-sector AI under tighter scrutiny. In its current form, the AI Act would ban some applications, such as government social-credit systems and law enforcement use of face recognition, outright. In the Netherlands, the same four parties that were in government prior to the resignation have now returned to government. Their solution is to bring all public-facing AI—both in government and in the private sector—under the eye of a regulator in the country’s data authority, which a government minister says would ensure that humans are kept in the loop. Services could be redesigned around latest technologies to make them more citizen-oriented and valuable for society. High-quality – personalized – public services and efficient public administrations could lead to higher welfare and improve the business environment as administrative procedures could be simplified.
The public sector deals with large amounts of data, so increasing efficiency is key., AI and automation can help increase processing speed, minimize costs, and provide services to the public faster. A public option LLM would provide a vital independent source of information and a testing ground for technological choices with big democratic consequences. This could work much like public option health care plans, which increase access to health services while also providing more transparency into operations in the sector and putting productive pressure on the pricing and features of private products.
DAO: The Benefits of AI for Local Governments
AI algorithms can analyze vast amounts of customer data, including demographics, preferences, browsing behavior, and purchase history, to segment audiences and deliver highly targeted and personalized marketing messages. By leveraging AI, marketers can tailor their campaigns to specific customer segments, increasing the relevance and effectiveness of their marketing efforts. This level of targeting and personalization can lead to higher conversion rates, improved customer satisfaction, and increased return on investment (ROI) for marketing campaigns. The ability to create a machine that can simulate human intelligence is no small feat. AI also needs to operate on the latest hardware and software to stay updated and meet the latest requirements, thus making it quite costly.
Read more about Benefits Of AI For Government here.