Justified Evidence Collection for Argument-based AI Fairness Assurance
It is well recognised that ensuring fair AI systems is a complex sociotechnical challenge, which requires careful deliberation and continuous oversight across all stages of a system's lifecycle, from defining requirements to model deployment and deprovisioning. Dynamic argument-based assurance cases, which present structured arguments supported by evidence, have emerged as a systematic approach to evaluating and mitigating safety risks and hazards in AI-enabled system development and have also been extended to deal with broader normative goals such as fairness and explainability. This paper introduces a systems-engineering-driven framework, supported by software tooling, to operationalise a dynamic approach to argument-based assurance in two stages. In the first stage, during the requirements planning phase, a multi-disciplinary and multi-stakeholder team define goals and claims to be established (and evidenced) by conducting a comprehensive fairness governance process. In the second stage, a continuous monitoring interface gathers evidence from existing artefacts (e.g. metrics from automated tests), such as model, data, and use case documentation, to support these arguments dynamically. The framework's effectiveness is demonstrated through an illustrative case study in finance, with a focus on supporting fairness-related arguments.
Code (1)
Tasks
FairnessMethods 이 논문이 사용한 방법론
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
A framework for assuring the accuracy and fidelity of an AI-enabled Digital Twin of en route UK airspace
Digital Twins combine simulation, operational data and Artificial Intelligence (AI), and have the potential to bring significant benefits across the aviation industry. Project Bluebird, an industry-academic collaboration…
A Principles-based Ethics Assurance Argument Pattern for AI and Autonomous Systems
An assurance case is a structured argument, typically produced by safety engineers, to communicate confidence that a critical or complex system, such as an aircraft, will be acceptably safe within its intended context. A…
EthicsTowards Continuous Assurance with Formal Verification and Assurance Cases
Autonomous systems must sustain justified confidence in their correctness and safety across their operational lifecycle-from design and deployment through post-deployment evolution. Traditional assurance methods often se…
Explainable Compliance Detection with Multi-Hop Natural Language Inference on Assurance Case Structure
Ensuring complex systems meet regulations typically requires checking the validity of assurance cases through a claim-argument-evidence framework. Some challenges in this process include the complicated nature of legal a…
Natural Language InferenceDefeaters and Eliminative Argumentation in Assurance 2.0
A traditional assurance case employs a positive argument in which reasoning steps, grounded on evidence and assumptions, sustain a top claim that has external significance. Human judgement is required to check the eviden…
valid