اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدBecoming Good at AI for Good
242
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
AI for good (AI4G) projects involve developing and applying artificial intelligence (AI) based solutions to further goals in areas such as sustainability, health, humanitarian aid, and social justice. Developing and deploying such solutions must be done in collaboration with partners who are experts in the domain in question and who already have experience in making progress towards such goals. Based on our experiences, we detail the different aspects of this type of collaboration broken down into four high-level categories: communication, data, modeling, and impact, and distill eleven takeaways to guide such projects in the future. We briefly describe two case studies to illustrate how some of these takeaways were applied in practice during our past collaborations.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
As the transformative potential of AI has become increasingly salient as a matter of public and political interest, there has been growing discussion about the need to ensure that AI broadly benefits humanity. This in turn has spurred debate on the s
ocial responsibilities of large technology companies to serve the interests of society at large. In response, ethical principles and codes of conduct have been proposed to meet the escalating demand for this responsibility to be taken seriously. As yet, however, few institutional innovations have been suggested to translate this responsibility into legal commitments which apply to companies positioned to reap large financial gains from the development and use of AI. This paper offers one potentially attractive tool for addressing such issues: the Windfall Clause, which is an ex ante commitment by AI firms to donate a significant amount of any eventual extremely large profits. By this we mean an early commitment that profits that a firm could not earn without achieving fundamental, economically transformative breakthroughs in AI capabilities will be donated to benefit humanity broadly, with particular attention towards mitigating any downsides from deployment of windfall-generating AI.
Forecasting plays a critical role in the development of organisational business strategies. Despite a considerable body of research in the area of forecasting, the focus has largely been on the financial and economic outcomes of the forecasting proce
ss as opposed to societal benefits. Our motivation in this study is to promote the latter, with a view to using the forecasting process to advance social and environmental objectives such as equality, social justice and sustainability. We refer to such forecasting practices as Forecasting for Social Good (FSG) where the benefits to society and the environment take precedence over economic and financial outcomes. We conceptualise FSG and discuss its scope and boundaries in the context of the Doughnut theory. We present some key attributes that qualify a forecasting process as FSG: it is concerned with a real problem, it is focused on advancing social and environmental goals and prioritises these over conventional measures of economic success, and it has a broad societal impact. We also position FSG in the wider literature on forecasting and social good practices. We propose an FSG maturity framework as the means to engage academics and practitioners with research in this area. Finally, we highlight that FSG: (i) cannot be distilled to a prescriptive set of guidelines, (ii) is scalable, and (iii) has the potential to make significant contributions to advancing social objectives.
We modify the transchromatic character maps to land in a faithfully flat extension of Morava E-theory. Our construction makes use of the interaction between topological and algebraic localization and completion. As an application we prove that centra
lizers of tuples of commuting prime-power order elements in good groups are good and we compute a new example.
Ethics in the emerging world of data science are often discussed through cautionary tales about the dire consequences of missteps taken by high profile companies or organizations. We take a different approach by foregrounding the ways that ethics are
implicated in the day-to-day work of data science, focusing on instances in which data scientists recognize, grapple with, and conscientiously respond to ethical challenges. This paper presents a case study of ethical dilemmas that arose in a data science for social good (DSSG) project focused on improving navigation for people with limited mobility. We describe how this particular DSSG team responded to those dilemmas, and how those responses gave rise to still more dilemmas. While the details of the case discussed here are unique, the ethical dilemmas they illuminate can commonly be found across many DSSG projects. These include: the risk of exacerbating disparities; the thorniness of algorithmic accountability; the evolving opportunities for mischief presented by new technologies; the subjective and value- laden interpretations at the heart of any data-intensive project; the potential for data to amplify or mute particular voices; the possibility of privacy violations; and the folly of technological solutionism. Based on our tracing of the teams responses to these dilemmas, we distill lessons for an ethical data science practice that can be more generally applied across DSSG projects. Specifically, this case experience highlights the importance of: 1) Setting the scene early on for ethical thinking 2) Recognizing ethical decision-making as an emergent phenomenon intertwined with the quotidian work of data science for social good 3) Approaching ethical thinking as a thoughtful and intentional balancing of priorities rather than a binary differentiation between right and wrong.
Although models for count data with over-dispersion have been widely considered in the literature, models for under-dispersion -- the opposite phenomenon -- have received less attention as it is only relatively common in particular research fields su
ch as biodosimetry and ecology. The Good distribution is a flexible alternative for modelling count data showing either over-dispersion or under-dispersion, although no R packages are still available to the best of our knowledge. We aim to present in the following the R package good that computes the standard probabilistic functions (i.e., probability density function, cumulative distribution function, and quantile function) and generates random samples from a population following a Good distribution. The package also considers a function for Good regression, including covariates in a similar way to that of the standard glm function. We finally show the use of such a package with some real-world data examples addressing both over-dispersion and especially under-dispersion.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
