Assuring Responsibility for Trustworthy Autonomous Systems
Lead Research Organisation:
University of York
Department Name: Computer Science
Abstract
Autonomous systems, such as medical systems, autonomous aerial and road vehicles, and manufacturing and agricultural robots, promise to extend and expand human capacities. But their benefits will only be harnessed if people have trust in the human processes around their design, development, and deployment. Enabling designers, engineers, developers, regulators, operators, and users to trace and allocate responsibility for the decisions, actions, failures, and outcomes of autonomous systems will be essential to this ecosystem of trust. If a self-driving car takes an action that affects you, you will want to know who is responsible for it and what are the channels for redress. If you are a doctor using an autonomous system in a clinical setting, you will want to understand the distribution of accountability between you, the healthcare organisation, and the developers of the system. Designers and engineers need clarity about what responsibilities fall on them, and when these transfer to other agents in the decision-making network. Manufacturers need to understand what they would be legally liable for. Mechanisms to achieve this transparency will not only provide all stakeholders with reassurance, they will also increase clarity, confidence, and competence amongst decision-makers.
The research project is an interdisciplinary programme of work - drawing on the disciplines of engineering, law, and philosophy - that culminates in a methodology to achieve precisely that tracing and allocation of responsibility. By 'tracing responsibility' we mean the process of tracking the autonomous system's decisions or outcomes back to the decisions of designers, engineers, or operators, and understanding what led to the outcome. By 'allocating responsibility' we mean both allocating role responsibilities to different agents across the life-cycle and working out in advance who would be legally liable and morally responsible for different system decisions and outcomes once they have occurred. This methodology will facilitate responsibility-by-design and responsibility-through-lifecycle.
In practice, the tracing and allocation of responsibility for the decisions and outcomes of AS is very complex. The complexity of the systems and the constant movement and unpredictability of their operational environments makes individual causal contributions difficult to distinguish. When this is combined with the fact that we delegate tasks to systems that require ethical judgement and lawful behaviour in human beings, it also gives rise to potential moral and legal responsibility gaps. The more complex and autonomous the system is, the more significant the role that assurance will play in tracing and allocating responsibility, especially in contexts that are technically and organisationally complex.
The research project tackles these challenges head on. First, we clarify the fundamental concepts of responsibility, the different kinds of responsibility in play, the different agents involved, and where 'responsibility gaps' arise and how they can be addressed. Second, we build on techniques used in the technical assurance of high-risk systems to reason about responsibility in the context of uncertainty and dynamism, and therefore unpredictable socio-technical environments. Together, these strands of work provide the basis for a methodology for responsibility-by-design and responsibility-through-lifecycle that can be used in practice by a wide range of stakeholders. Assurance of responsibility will be achieved that not only identifies which agents are responsible for which outcomes and in what way throughout the lifecycle, and explains how this identification is achieved, but also establishes why this tracing and allocation of responsibility is well-justified and complete.
The research project is an interdisciplinary programme of work - drawing on the disciplines of engineering, law, and philosophy - that culminates in a methodology to achieve precisely that tracing and allocation of responsibility. By 'tracing responsibility' we mean the process of tracking the autonomous system's decisions or outcomes back to the decisions of designers, engineers, or operators, and understanding what led to the outcome. By 'allocating responsibility' we mean both allocating role responsibilities to different agents across the life-cycle and working out in advance who would be legally liable and morally responsible for different system decisions and outcomes once they have occurred. This methodology will facilitate responsibility-by-design and responsibility-through-lifecycle.
In practice, the tracing and allocation of responsibility for the decisions and outcomes of AS is very complex. The complexity of the systems and the constant movement and unpredictability of their operational environments makes individual causal contributions difficult to distinguish. When this is combined with the fact that we delegate tasks to systems that require ethical judgement and lawful behaviour in human beings, it also gives rise to potential moral and legal responsibility gaps. The more complex and autonomous the system is, the more significant the role that assurance will play in tracing and allocating responsibility, especially in contexts that are technically and organisationally complex.
The research project tackles these challenges head on. First, we clarify the fundamental concepts of responsibility, the different kinds of responsibility in play, the different agents involved, and where 'responsibility gaps' arise and how they can be addressed. Second, we build on techniques used in the technical assurance of high-risk systems to reason about responsibility in the context of uncertainty and dynamism, and therefore unpredictable socio-technical environments. Together, these strands of work provide the basis for a methodology for responsibility-by-design and responsibility-through-lifecycle that can be used in practice by a wide range of stakeholders. Assurance of responsibility will be achieved that not only identifies which agents are responsible for which outcomes and in what way throughout the lifecycle, and explains how this identification is achieved, but also establishes why this tracing and allocation of responsibility is well-justified and complete.
Publications
Kaas M
(2023)
Ethics in conversation
Porter Z
(2023)
A principles-based ethics assurance argument pattern for AI and autonomous systems
in AI and Ethics
Porter Z
(2022)
Distinguishing two features of accountability for AI technologies
in Nature Machine Intelligence
Zoe Porter
(2023)
Unravelling Responsibility for AI
Description | Developing a methodology for ethics assurance for AI and autonomous systems Developing a clearer basis for unravelling responsibility for AI Developing industrial use cases for exploring ethics, safety and responsibility for AI |
Exploitation Route | Closer engagement of policy makers |
Sectors | Healthcare Government Democracy and Justice Transport |
Description | Alan Turing Institute and University of York: Trustworthy and Ethical Assurance Platform: Providing a methodology for assuring AI and digital systems (https://www.gov.uk/ai-assurance-techniques/alan-turing-institute-and-university-of-york-trustworthy-and-ethical-assurance-platform). |
First Year Of Impact | 2023 |
Sector | Communities and Social Services/Policy,Healthcare,Government, Democracy and Justice |
Impact Types | Policy & public services |
Description | Advice on best practice in AI/Software for the Software and AI as a Medical Device Change Programme - Roadmap |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
Impact | Plan to support the update of the international standard IEC 62304. |
URL | https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/software-and-ai-as-a-medical-device-change-programme/soft... |
Description | CPD in safety |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to new or improved professional practice |
Impact | Improved ways to process ethically sensitive decisions in AI and autonomy |
Description | Input to Office for AI (work on AI safety) |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Participation in a guidance/advisory committee |
Description | Lecture of clinical safety of AI |
Geographic Reach | National |
Policy Influence Type | Contribution to new or improved professional practice |
Description | AI and Digital Twins |
Amount | £60,065 (GBP) |
Organisation | Arts & Humanities Research Council (AHRC) |
Sector | Public |
Country | United Kingdom |
Start | 02/2024 |
End | 07/2024 |
Description | DAISY - Robot-Assisted A&E Triage |
Amount | £145,094 (GBP) |
Organisation | Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) |
Sector | Public |
Country | United Kingdom |
Start | 03/2022 |
End | 03/2023 |
Description | The Centre for Assuring Autonomy |
Amount | £4,000,000 (GBP) |
Organisation | Lloyd's Register Foundation |
Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
Country | United Kingdom |
Start | 01/2024 |
End | 12/2028 |
Description | UKRI AI Centre for Doctoral Training in Lifelong Safety Assurance of AI-enabled Autonomous Systems (SAINTS) |
Amount | £8,050,129 (GBP) |
Organisation | United Kingdom Research and Innovation |
Sector | Public |
Country | United Kingdom |
Start | 03/2024 |
End | 09/2032 |
Description | Developing an ethics assurance case |
Organisation | Ufonia Limited |
Country | United Kingdom |
Sector | Private |
PI Contribution | Developing an ethics assurance case for an AI-based system in healthcare |
Collaborator Contribution | Working closely with a multi-disciplinary team on instantiating the argument patterns presented in our arXiv paper (A Principles-based Ethical Assurance Argument for AI and Autonomous Systems). |
Impact | The collaboration is multi-disciplinary, mainly involving engineers, ethicists and clinicians. |
Start Year | 2022 |
Description | Trustworthy and Ethical Assurance for AI and Autonomous Systems in Digital Healthcare (TEA-DH) |
Organisation | Alan Turing Institute |
Country | United Kingdom |
Sector | Academic/University |
PI Contribution | Collaboration with the Alan Turing Institute on the Notion of Ethics and Trustworthy Assurance |
Collaborator Contribution | The collaboration has created a methodology for developing assurance cases for digital and AI-based systems, with a focus on healthcare. |
Impact | Outputs under review |
Start Year | 2023 |
Description | Clinical AI: Cure or disease? |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | Regional |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | Clinical AI: Cure or disease? Ibrahim Habli In the evolving landscape of healthcare, Artificial intelligence (AI) promises to improve patient outcomes and release scarce resources. However, reaping these benefits also brings patient safety risks. In this talk, I'll explore the intricacies of using AI safely in healthcare. I'll then present clinical examples and real-world cases that highlight the potential risks and harms, while also outlining proactive strategies to mitigate these concerns. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
Description | Keynote at the THE SCANDINAVIAN CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE SAFETY in |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
Results and Impact | Keynote on Assuring the ethics of AI and autonomous |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
URL | https://www.saferresearch.com/events/scandinavian-conference-systems-and-software-safety |
Description | Living With AI Podcast: Challenges of Living with Artificial Intelligence AI & Taking Responsibility |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
Results and Impact | A Projects episode focusing on projects dedicated to researching the responsibility aspects of AI: Responsibility Projects - UKRI Trustworthy Autonomous Systems Hub (tas.ac.uk) Our guests this week are: 1. Lars Kunze - Responsible AI for Long-term Trustworthy Autonomous Systems 2. Shannon Vallor - Making systems Answer 3. Ibrahim Habli - Assuring Responsibility for Trustworthy Autonomous Systems (AR-TAS) |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
URL | https://www.buzzsprout.com/1447474/13158541-ai-taking-responsibility |
Description | Reflections on AI Governance in 2023 |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | 2023 has been a big year for AI governance. Research Fellow, Dr Zoe Porter, explores three key reflections arising from these developments and what they can tell us about the future of safe AI. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
URL | https://www.york.ac.uk/assuring-autonomy/news/blog/ai-governance-2023/ |
Description | TAS 2024 (Panel on Healthcare) |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Other audiences |
Results and Impact | Panel on AI/AS in Healthcare (Panelist: Zoe Porter) |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |
Description | TAS 2024 (Panel on Transport) |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Other audiences |
Results and Impact | TAS 2024 (Panel on Transport): Ibrahim Habli |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2024 |
Description | Who decides when AI is safe enough? |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | Who decides when AI is safe enough? A featured article on balancing the technical and ethical sides of assuring the safety of AI in the complex world of healthcare |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
URL | https://features.york.ac.uk/who-decides-when-ai-is-safe-enough/index.html |