Lundgren2021MachineDecisions-B

There are multiple notes about this text. See also: Lundgren2021MachineDecisions-A

Lundgren2021MachineDecisions-A

Björn Lundgren, "Ethical machine decisions and the input‑selection problem"

Bibliographic info

Lundgren, B. Ethical machine decisions and the input-selection problem. Synthese 199, 11423–11443 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03296-0

Commentary

The text discusses the input-selection problem in machine decision-making, focusing on the trade-offs between inputs needed for ethical decisions and the risks of using those inputs. It uses an example of determining whether someone is a grandmother to illustrate the complexities and potential harms of adding inputs. The text emphasizes the importance of considering transparency, privacy, and time constraints in the ethical evaluation of machine decisions.

It is thought-provoking that a novel perspective by focusing on the input-selection problem in machine decision-making is introduced. It highlights the critical role of inputs in achieving ethical decisions and raises awareness of the trade-offs involved in adding inputs to AI systems.

The text covers a wide range of ethical considerations, including transparency, privacy, data protection, and time constraints. As a result, some aspects could be explored in more depth, and the overall complexity of the discussion might be challenging for readers unfamiliar with the subject.

Excerpts & Key Quotes

⇒ For 3-5 key passages, include the following: a descriptive heading, the page number, the verbatim quote, and your brief commentary on this

Increased model complexity and decreased transparency

"Transparency is decreased when model size increases. Given that adding inputs increases the size of the model, adding inputs, ceteris paribus, generally decreases model transparency."

Comment:

While it is true that increased model complexity can reduce transparency, this statement oversimplifies the relationship between inputs and transparency. The impact of inputs on transparency can vary depending on the type of input, the interpretability of the model, and the methods used for feature selection. Focusing just on model size might overlook other factors that influence transparency, leading to an incomplete analysis of the trade-offs.

(Replace this heading text for this passage)

"Currently, the ethical analysis of machine decisions focuses only on the first step. It ignores technical limitations; it ignores the potential trade-offs of having certain machine decision-making capabilities; proponents for the standard approach also largely ignore the normative evaluation needed for the value and disvalue of certainty and uncertainty; and it does not address the particulars of time-sensitive decision-making."

Comment:

The text criticizes the current approach to ethical analysis of machine decisions, however it does not provide a comprehensive alternative. Merely identifying the shortcomings of the current approach without offering concrete solutions limits the practical value of the critique. To improve the ethical analysis, the text could suggest specific methodologies or ethical frameworks that consider technical limitations, trade-offs, and time-sensitive decision-making. This would enhance the applicability and relevance of the argument.

(Replace this heading text for this passage)

"Understanding political decisions is also important, at least in a democracy. It is also important for political participation, since if you do not understand the political process or political decision-making, then participation will be difficult. Hence, political usage of algorithmic decision-making may make political participation more difficult."

Comment:

While the text raises a valid concern about algorithmic decision-making and political participation, it does not address the potential benefits of transparency and explainability in political decision-making processes. Transparent algorithms can help citizens understand the basis of political decisions and promote trust in the system. The critical comment would be that the text should acknowledge the potential for algorithmic transparency to enhance democratic processes while still being cautious about privacy and misuse concerns.