The ethical and societal implications of artificial intelligence systems raise concerns. In this paper we outline a novel process based on applied ethics, namely Z-inspection®, to assess if an AI system is trustworthy. We use the definition of trustworthy AI given by the high-level European Commission's expert group on AI. Z-inspection® is a general inspection process that can be applied to a variety of domains where AI systems are used, such as business, healthcare, public sector, among many others. To the best of our knowledge, Z-inspection® is the first process to assess trustworthy AI in practice.

State-of-the-art cache-oblivious parallel algorithms for dynamic programming (DP) problems usually guarantee asymptotically optimal cache performance without any tuning of cache parameters, but they often fail to exploit the theoretically best parallelism at the same time. While these algorithms achieve cache-optimality through the use of a recursive divide-and-conquer (DAC) strategy, scheduling tasks at the granularity of task dependency introduces artificial dependencies in addition to those arising from the defining recurrence equations. We removed the artificial dependency by scheduling tasks ready for execution as soon as all its real dependency constraints are satisfied, while preserving the cache-optimality by inheriting the DAC strategy. We applied our approach to a set of widely known dynamic programming problems, such as Floyd-Warshall's All-Pairs Shortest Paths, Stencil, and LCS. Theoretical analyses show that our techniques improve the span of 2-way DAC-based Floyd Warshall's algorithm on an n node graph from Θ n log 2 n to Θ (n), stencil computations on a d-dimensional hypercubic grid of width w for h time steps from Θ (d 2 h)w log(d+2)−1 to Θ (h), and LCS on two sequences of length n each from Θ n log 2 3 to Θ (n). In each case, the total work and cache complexity remain asymptotically optimal. Experimental measurements exhibit a 3 -5 times improvement in absolute running time, 10 -20 times improvement in burdened span by Cilkview, and approximately the same L1/L2 cache misses by PAPI.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to greatly improve the delivery of healthcare and other services that advance population health and wellbeing. However, the use of AI in healthcare also brings potential risks that may cause unintended harm. To guide future developments in AI, the High-Level Expert Group on AI set up by the European Commission (EC), recently published ethics guidelines for what it terms “trustworthy” AI. These guidelines are aimed at a variety of stakeholders, especially guiding practitioners toward more ethical and more robust applications of AI. In line with efforts of the EC, AI ethics scholarship focuses increasingly on converting abstract principles into actionable recommendations. However, the interpretation, relevance, and implementation of trustworthy AI depend on the domain and the context in which the AI system is used. The main contribution of this paper is to demonstrate how to use the general AI HLEG trustworthy AI guidelines in practice in the healthcare domain. To this end, we present a best practice of assessing the use of machine learning as a supportive tool to recognize cardiac arrest in emergency calls. The AI system under assessment is currently in use in the city of Copenhagen in Denmark. The assessment is accomplished by an independent team composed of philosophers, policy makers, social scientists, technical, legal, and medical experts. By leveraging an interdisciplinary team, we aim to expose the complex trade-offs and the necessity for such thorough human review when tackling socio-technical applications of AI in healthcare. For the assessment, we use a process to assess trustworthy AI, called 1Z-Inspection® to identify specific challenges and potential ethical trade-offs when we consider AI in practice.

No abstract

This paper documents how an ethically aligned co-design methodology ensures trustworthiness in the early design phase of an artificial intelligence (AI) system component for healthcare. The system explains decisions made by deep learning networks analyzing images of skin lesions. The co-design of trustworthy AI developed here used a holistic approach rather than a static ethical checklist and required a multidisciplinary team of experts working with the AI designers and their managers. Ethical, legal, and technical issues potentially arising from the future use of the AI system were investigated. This paper is a first report on co-designing in the early design phase. Our results can also serve as guidance for other early-phase AI-similar tool developments.