Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.10536 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866929501270704128 |
|---|---|
| author | De Castris, A. Leone Thomas, C. |
| author_facet | De Castris, A. Leone Thomas, C. |
| contents | Governments, industry, and other actors involved in governing AI technologies around the world agree that, while AI offers tremendous promise to benefit the world, appropriate guardrails are required to mitigate risks. Global institutions, including the OECD, the G7, the G20, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe, have already started developing frameworks for ethical and responsible AI governance. While these are important initial steps, they alone fall short of addressing the need for institutionalised international processes to identify and assess potentially harmful AI capabilities. Contributing to the relevant conversation on how to address this gap, this chapter reflects on what functions an international AI safety institute could perform. Based on the analysis of both existing international governance models addressing safety considerations in adjacent policy areas and the newly established national AI safety institutes in the UK and US, the chapter identifies a list of concrete functions that could be performed at the international level. While creating a new international body is not the only way forward, understanding the structure of these bodies from a modular perspective can help us to identify the tools at our disposal. These, we suggest, can be categorised under three functional domains: a) technical research and cooperation, b) safeguards and evaluations, c) policymaking and governance support. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2409_10536 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | The potential functions of an international institution for AI safety. Insights from adjacent policy areas and recent trends De Castris, A. Leone Thomas, C. Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence Governments, industry, and other actors involved in governing AI technologies around the world agree that, while AI offers tremendous promise to benefit the world, appropriate guardrails are required to mitigate risks. Global institutions, including the OECD, the G7, the G20, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe, have already started developing frameworks for ethical and responsible AI governance. While these are important initial steps, they alone fall short of addressing the need for institutionalised international processes to identify and assess potentially harmful AI capabilities. Contributing to the relevant conversation on how to address this gap, this chapter reflects on what functions an international AI safety institute could perform. Based on the analysis of both existing international governance models addressing safety considerations in adjacent policy areas and the newly established national AI safety institutes in the UK and US, the chapter identifies a list of concrete functions that could be performed at the international level. While creating a new international body is not the only way forward, understanding the structure of these bodies from a modular perspective can help us to identify the tools at our disposal. These, we suggest, can be categorised under three functional domains: a) technical research and cooperation, b) safeguards and evaluations, c) policymaking and governance support. |
| title | The potential functions of an international institution for AI safety. Insights from adjacent policy areas and recent trends |
| topic | Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.10536 |