Public Constitutional AI
We are increasingly subjected to the power of AI authorities. As AI decisions become inescapable, entering domains such as healthcare, education, and law, we must confront a vital question: how can we ensure AI systems have the legitimacy necessary for effective governance? This essay argues that to secure AI legitimacy, we need methods that engage the public in designing and constraining AI systems, ensuring these technologies reflect the community's shared values. Constitutional AI, proposed by Anthropic, represents a step towards this goal, offering a model for democratic control of AI. However, while Constitutional AI's commitment to hardcoding explicit principles into AI models enhances transparency and accountability, it falls short in two crucial aspects: addressing the opacity of individual AI decisions and fostering genuine democratic legitimacy. To overcome these limitations, this essay proposes "Public Constitutional AI." This approach envisions a participatory process where diverse stakeholders, including ordinary citizens, deliberate on the principles guiding AI development. The resulting "AI Constitution" would carry the legitimacy of popular authorship, grounding AI governance in the public will. Furthermore, the essay proposes "AI Courts" to develop "AI case law," providing concrete examples for operationalizing constitutional principles in AI training. This evolving combination of constitutional principles and case law aims to make AI governance more responsive to public values. By grounding AI governance in deliberative democratic processes, Public Constitutional AI offers a path to imbue automated authorities with genuine democratic legitimacy, addressing the unique challenges posed by increasingly powerful AI systems while ensuring their alignment with the public interest.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Constitutional Governance in Metric Spaces
Computational social choice and algorithmic decision theory offer rich aggregation theory but no end-to-end process for egalitarian self-governance: aggregation, deliberation, amendment, and consensus are each considered…
Populist Constitutional Backsliding and Judicial Independence: Evidence from Turkiye
The synthetic control method has emerged as a widely utilized empirical tool for estimating the causal effects of public policies, natural disasters, and other interventions on various economic, social, institutional, an…
Constitutional Midtraining: Content Presence Drives Alignment Gains
Post-training alignment is often shallow, eroding under fine-tuning. It remains untested as to whether constitutional midtraining interventions can produce durable alignment when cleanly isolated from post-training. We b…
How do "technical" design-choices made when building algorithmic decision-making tools for criminal justice authorities create constitutional dangers?
This two part paper argues that seemingly "technical" choices made by developers of machine-learning based algorithmic tools used to inform decisions by criminal justice authorities can create serious constitutional dang…
Decision MakingCollective Constitutional AI: Aligning a Language Model with Public Input
There is growing consensus that language model (LM) developers should not be the sole deciders of LM behavior, creating a need for methods that enable the broader public to collectively shape the behavior of LM systems t…
Language ModelingLanguage ModellingMath