Search results for: pretend fairness

Authors: Amarendar Reddy Addula

Abstract:

Definition of Artificial Intelligence: Artificial intelligence is the simulation of mortal intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems. Explicit operations of AI comprise expert systems, natural language processing, and speech recognition, and machine vision. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is an original medium for digital business, according to a new report by Gartner. The last 10 times represent an advance period in AI’s development, prodded by the confluence of factors, including the rise of big data, advancements in cipher structure, new machine literacy ways, the materialization of pall computing, and the vibrant open- source ecosystem. Influence of AI to a broader set of use cases and druggies and its gaining fashionability because it improves AI’s versatility, effectiveness, and rigidity. Edge AI will enable digital moments by employing AI for real- time analytics closer to data sources. Gartner predicts that by 2025, further than 50 of all data analysis by deep neural networks will do at the edge, over from lower than 10 in 2021. Responsible AI is a marquee term for making suitable business and ethical choices when espousing AI. It requires considering business and societal value, threat, trust, translucency, fairness, bias mitigation, explainability, responsibility, safety, sequestration, and nonsupervisory compliance. Responsible AI is ever more significant amidst growing nonsupervisory oversight, consumer prospects, and rising sustainability pretensions. Generative AI is the use of AI to induce new vestiges and produce innovative products. To date, generative AI sweats have concentrated on creating media content similar as photorealistic images of people and effects, but it can also be used for law generation, creating synthetic irregular data, and designing medicinals and accoutrements with specific parcels. AI is the subject of a wide- ranging debate in which there's a growing concern about its ethical and legal aspects. Constantly, the two are varied and nonplussed despite being different issues and areas of knowledge. The ethical debate raises two main problems the first, abstract, relates to the idea and content of ethics; the alternate, functional, and concerns its relationship with the law. Both set up models of social geste, but they're different in compass and nature. The juridical analysis is grounded on anon-formalistic scientific methodology. This means that it's essential to consider the nature and characteristics of the AI as a primary step to the description of its legal paradigm. In this regard, there are two main issues the relationship between artificial and mortal intelligence and the question of the unitary or different nature of the AI. From that theoretical and practical base, the study of the legal system is carried out by examining its foundations, the governance model, and the nonsupervisory bases. According to this analysis, throughout the work and in the conclusions, International Law is linked as the top legal frame for the regulation of AI.

Keywords: artificial intelligence, ethics & human rights issues, laws, international laws

Procedia PDF Downloads 92

Authors: Bruna Azzari Puga, Richard Roe, Andre Pagani de Souza

Abstract:

abstract outlines a proposed study to examine how and to what extent interactive, experiential, learner centered methodology develops learning of basic civic and democratic competencies among young children. It stems from the Literacy and Law course taught at Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, DC, since 1998. Law students, trained in best literacy practices and legal cases affecting literacy development, read “law related” children’s books and engage in interactive and extension activities with emerging readers. The law students write a monthly journal describing their experiences and a final paper: a conventional paper or a children’s book illuminating some aspect of literacy and law. This proposal is based on the recent adaptation of Literacy and Law to Brazil at Mackenzie Presbyterian University in São Paulo in three forms: first, a course similar to the US model, often conducted jointly online with Brazilian and US law students; second, a similar course that combines readings of children’s literature with activity based learning, with law students from a satellite Mackenzie campus, for young children from a vulnerable community near the city; and third, a course taught by law students at the main Mackenzie campus for 4th grade students at the Mackenzie elementary school, that is wholly activity and discourse based. The workings and outcomes of these courses are well documented by photographs, reports, lesson plans, and law student journals. The authors, faculty who teach the above courses at Mackenzie and Georgetown, observe that literacy, broadly defined as cognitive and expressive development through reading and discourse-based activities, can be influential in developing democratic civic skills, identifiable by explicit civic competencies. For example, children experience justice in the classroom through cooperation, creativity, diversity, fairness, systemic thinking, and appreciation for rules and their purposes. Moreover, the learning of civic skills as well as the literacy skills is enhanced through interactive, learner centered practices in which the learners experience literacy and civic development. This study will develop rubrics for individual and classroom teaching and supervision by examining 1) the children’s books and students diaries of participating law students and 2) the collection of photos and videos of classroom activities, and 3) faculty and supervisor observations and reports. These rubrics, and the lesson plans and activities which are employed to advance the higher levels of performance outcomes, will be useful in training and supervision and in further replication and promotion of this form of teaching and learning. Examples of outcomes include helping, cooperating and participating; appreciation of viewpoint diversity; knowledge and utilization of democratic processes, including due process, advocacy, individual and shared decision making, consensus building, and voting; establishing and valuing appropriate rules and a reasoned approach to conflict resolution. In conclusion, further development and replication of the learner centered literacy and law practices outlined here can lead to improved qualities of democratic teaching and learning supporting mutual respect, positivity, deep learning, and the common good – foundation qualities of a sustainable world.

Keywords: democracy, law, learner-centered, literacy

Procedia PDF Downloads 118

Authors: Shreyas Kumar, Mili Shangari

Abstract:

Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) in the cyber insurance sector represents a significant advancement, offering the potential to revolutionize risk assessment, fraud detection, and claims processing. However, this integration introduces a range of regulatory and economic challenges that must be addressed to ensure responsible and effective deployment of AI technologies. This paper examines the multifaceted regulatory landscape governing AI in cyber insurance and explores the economic implications of compliance, innovation, and market dynamics. AI's capabilities in processing vast amounts of data and identifying patterns make it an invaluable tool for insurers in managing cyber risks. Yet, the application of AI in this domain is subject to stringent regulatory scrutiny aimed at safeguarding data privacy, ensuring algorithmic transparency, and preventing biases. Regulatory bodies, such as the European Union with its General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), mandate strict compliance requirements that can significantly impact the deployment of AI systems. These regulations necessitate robust data protection measures, ethical AI practices, and clear accountability frameworks, all of which entail substantial compliance costs for insurers. The economic implications of these regulatory requirements are profound. Insurers must invest heavily in upgrading their IT infrastructure, implementing robust data governance frameworks, and training personnel to handle AI systems ethically and effectively. These investments, while essential for regulatory compliance, can strain financial resources, particularly for smaller insurers, potentially leading to market consolidation. Furthermore, the cost of regulatory compliance can translate into higher premiums for policyholders, affecting the overall affordability and accessibility of cyber insurance. Despite these challenges, the potential economic benefits of AI integration in cyber insurance are significant. AI-enhanced risk assessment models can provide more accurate pricing, reduce the incidence of fraudulent claims, and expedite claims processing, leading to overall cost savings and increased efficiency. These efficiencies can improve the competitiveness of insurers and drive innovation in product offerings. However, balancing these benefits with regulatory compliance is crucial to avoid legal penalties and reputational damage. The paper also explores the potential risks associated with AI integration, such as algorithmic biases that could lead to unfair discrimination in policy underwriting and claims adjudication. Regulatory frameworks need to evolve to address these issues, promoting fairness and transparency in AI applications. Policymakers play a critical role in creating a balanced regulatory environment that fosters innovation while protecting consumer rights and ensuring market stability. In conclusion, the integration of AI in cyber insurance presents both regulatory and economic challenges that require a coordinated approach involving regulators, insurers, and other stakeholders. By navigating these challenges effectively, the industry can harness the transformative potential of AI, driving advancements in risk management and enhancing the resilience of the cyber insurance market. This paper provides insights and recommendations for policymakers and industry leaders to achieve a balanced and sustainable integration of AI technologies in cyber insurance.

Keywords: artificial intelligence (AI), cyber insurance, regulatory compliance, economic impact, risk assessment, fraud detection, cyber liability insurance, risk management, ransomware

Procedia PDF Downloads 28

Authors: Diogo José Morgado Rebelo, Francisco António Carneiro Pacheco de Andrade, Paulo Jorge Freitas de Oliveira Novais

Abstract:

Not everything in AI-power consumer credit scoring turns out to be a wonder. When using AI in Creditworthiness Assessment (CWA), opacity and unfairness ‘sins’ must be considered to the task be deemed Responsible. AI software is not always 100% accurate, which can lead to misclassification. Discrimination of some groups can be exponentiated. A hetero personalized identity can be imposed on the individual(s) affected. Also, autonomous CWA sometimes lacks transparency when using black box models. However, for this intended purpose, human analysts ‘on-the-loop’ might not be the best remedy consumers are looking for in credit. This study seeks to explore the legality of implementing a Multi-Agent System (MAS) framework in consumer CWA to ensure compliance with the regulation outlined in Article 14(4) of the Proposal for an Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA), dated 21 April 2021 (as per the last corrigendum by the European Parliament on 19 April 2024), Especially with the adoption of Art. 18(8)(9) of the EU Directive 2023/2225, of 18 October, which will go into effect on 20 November 2026, there should be more emphasis on the need for hybrid oversight in AI-driven scoring to ensure fairness and transparency. In fact, the range of EU regulations on AI-based consumer credit will soon impact the AI lending industry locally and globally, as shown by the broad territorial scope of AIA’s Art. 2. Consequently, engineering the law of consumer’s CWA is imperative. Generally, the proposed MAS framework consists of several layers arranged in a specific sequence, as follows: firstly, the Data Layer gathers legitimate predictor sets from traditional sources; then, the Decision Support System Layer, whose Neural Network model is trained using k-fold Cross Validation, provides recommendations based on the feeder data; the eXplainability (XAI) multi-structure comprises Three-Step-Agents; and, lastly, the Oversight Layer has a 'Bottom Stop' for analysts to intervene in a timely manner. From the analysis, one can assure a vital component of this software is the XAY layer. It appears as a transparent curtain covering the AI’s decision-making process, enabling comprehension, reflection, and further feasible oversight. Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME) might act as a pillar by offering counterfactual insights. SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP), another agent in the XAI layer, could address potential discrimination issues, identifying the contribution of each feature to the prediction. Alternatively, for thin or no file consumers, the Suggestion Agent can promote financial inclusion. It uses lawful alternative sources such as the share of wallet, among others, to search for more advantageous solutions to incomplete evaluation appraisals based on genetic programming. Overall, this research aspires to bring the concept of Machine-Centered Anthropocentrism to the table of EU policymaking. It acknowledges that, when put into service, credit analysts no longer exert full control over the data-driven entities programmers have given ‘birth’ to. With similar explanatory agents under supervision, AI itself can become self-accountable, prioritizing human concerns and values. AI decisions should not be vilified inherently. The issue lies in how they are integrated into decision-making and whether they align with non-discrimination principles and transparency rules.

Keywords: creditworthiness assessment, hybrid oversight, machine-centered anthropocentrism, EU policymaking

Procedia PDF Downloads 31

Authors: Nathan Garcia

Abstract:

The polarizing dialogue of contemporary political America results from core philosophical differences. But these differences are beyond ideological and reach metaphysical distinction. Good intellectual historians have theorized that fundamental concepts such as freedom, God, and nature have been sterilized of their intellectual vigor. They are partially correct. 19th-century pragmatist Charles Sanders Peirce offers a penetrating philosophy which can yield greater insight into the contemporary political divide. Peirce argues that metaphysical and ethical issues are derivative of operational logic. His triadic logical structure and ensuing metaphysical principles constructed therefrom is contemporaneously applicable for three reasons. First, Peirce’s logic aptly scrutinizes the logical processes of liberal and conservative mindsets. Each group arrives at a cosmological root metaphor (abduction), resulting in a contemporary assessment (deduction), ultimately prompting attempts to verify the original abduction (induction). Peirce’s system demonstrates that liberal citizens develop a cosmological root metaphor in the concept of fairness (abduction), resulting in a contemporary assessment of, for example, underrepresented communities being unfairly preyed upon (deduction), thereby inciting anger toward traditional socio-political structures suspected of purposefully destabilizing minority communities (induction). Similarly, conservative citizens develop a cosmological root metaphor in the concept of freedom (abduction), resulting in a contemporary assessment of, for example, liberal citizens advocating an expansion of governmental powers (deduction), thereby inciting anger towards liberal communities suspected of attacking freedoms of ordinary Americans in a bid to empower their interests through the government (induction). The value of this triadic assessment is the categorization of distinct types of inferential logic by their purpose and boundaries. Only deductive claims can be concretely proven, while abductive claims are merely preliminary hypotheses, and inductive claims are accountable to interdisciplinary oversight. Liberals and conservative logical processes preclude constructive dialogue because of (a) an unshared abductive framework, and (b) misunderstanding the rules and responsibilities of their types of claims. Second, Peircean metaphysical principles offer a greater summary of the contemporaneously divisive political climate. His insights can weed through the partisan theorizing to unravel the underlying philosophical problems. Corrosive nominalistic and essentialistic presuppositions weaken the ability to share experiences and communicate effectively, both requisite for any promising constructive dialogue. Peirce’s pragmatist system can expose and evade fallacious thinking in pursuit of a refreshing alternative framework. Finally, Peirce’s metaphysical foundation enables a logically coherent, scientifically informed orthopraxis well-suited for American dialogue. His logical structure necessitates radically different anthropology conducive to shared experiences and dialogue within a dynamic, cultural continuum. Pierce’s fallibilism and sensitivity to religious sentiment successfully navigate between liberal and conservative values. In sum, he provides a normative paradigm for intranational dialogue that privileges individual experience and values morally defensible notions of freedom, God, and nature. Utilizing Peirce’s thought will yield fruitful analysis and offers a promising philosophical alternative for framing and engaging in contemporary American political discourse.

Keywords: Charles s. Peirce, american politics, logic, pragmatism

Procedia PDF Downloads 113

Authors: Enwin Anthony Dornubari, Visigah Kpobari Peter

Abstract:

This research has developed a framework for the provision of sustainable and affordable housing to accommodate the low-income population of Greater Port Harcourt City. The objectives of this study among others, were to: examine UN-Habitat guidelines for acceptable and sustainable social housing provision, describe past efforts of the Rivers State Government and the Federal Government of Nigeria to provide housing for the poor in the Greater Port Harcourt City area; obtain a profile of prospective beneficiaries of the social housing proposed by this research as well as perceptions of their present living conditions, and living in the proposed self-sustaining social housing development, based on the initial simulation of the proposal; describe the nature of the framework, guideline and management of the proposed social housing development and explain the modalities for its implementation. The study utilized the mixed methods research approach, aimed at triangulating findings from the quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Opinions of professional of the built environment; Director, Development Control, Greater Port Harcourt City Development Authority; Directors of Ministry of Urban Development and Physical Planning; Housing and Property Development Authority and managers of selected Primary Mortgage Institutions were sought and analyzed. There were four target populations for the study, namely: members of occupational sub-groups for FGDs (Focused Group Discussions); development professionals for KIIs (Key Informant Interviews), household heads in selected communities of GPHC; and relevant public officials for IDI (Individual Depth Interview). Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were held with members of occupational sub-groups in each of the eight selected communities (Fisherfolk). The table shows that there were forty (40) members across all occupational sub-groups in each selected community, yielding a total of 320 in the eight (8) communities of Mgbundukwu (Mile 2 Diobu), Rumuodomaya, Abara (Etche), Igwuruta-Ali(Ikwerre), Wakama(Ogu-Bolo), Okujagu (Okrika), Akpajo (Eleme), and Okoloma (Oyigbo). For key informant interviews, two (2) members were judgmentally selected from each of the following development professions: urban and regional planners; architects; estate surveyors; land surveyors; quantity surveyors; and engineers. Concerning Population 3-Household Heads in Selected Communities of GPHC, a stratified multi-stage sampling procedure was adopted: Stage 1-Obtaining a 10% (a priori decision) sample of the component communities of GPHC in each stratum. The number in each stratum was rounded to one whole number to ensure representation of each stratum. Stage 2-Obtaining the number of households to be studied after applying the Taro Yamane formula, which aided in determining the appropriate number of cases to be studied at the precision level of 5%. Findings revealed, amongst others, that poor implementation of the UN-Habitat global shelter strategy, lack of stakeholder engagement, inappropriate locations, undue bureaucracy, lack of housing fairness and equity and high cost of land and building materials were the reasons for the failure of past efforts towards social housing provision in the Greater Port Harcourt City area. The study recommended a public-private partnership approach for the implementation and management of the framework. It also recommended a robust and sustained relationship between the management of the framework and the UN-Habitat office and other relevant government agencies responsible for housing development and all investment partners to create trust and efficiency.

Keywords: development, framework, low-income, sustainable, social housing

Procedia PDF Downloads 244