Alongside the revolutionary benefits of AI, it can cause numerous problems across the system development process. AI ecosytem players have recently started to interrogate the ethical biases implicit in AI-enabled applications and agents. The contestable nature of ethics and the complexity of AI-enabled applications has led to incoherent literature around AI ethical biases. The numerous conceptions of AI ethics and a multiplicity of ethical biases has compounded matters for researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. The current study proposes a conceptual framework to organize AI ethical biases. A narrative literature review was conducted to identify and group the biases into data biases, method biases and implementation biases. The CRISP-DM framework was used to classify the ethical biases. The emerging conceptual framework has four clusters that represents: System development phases, scope of ethical bias, exemplars, and possible solutions. The study extends the existing AI ethical frameworks and provides a unified communication artefact for practitioners.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chowdhury et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: