The broad application of artificial intelligence techniques in medicine is currently hindered by limited dataset availability for algorithm training and validation, due to the absence of standardized electronic medical records, and strict legal and ethical requirements to protect patient privacy. In medical imaging, harmonized data exchange formats such as Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine and electronic data storage are the standard, partially addressing the first issue, but the requirements for privacy preservation are equally strict. To prevent patient privacy compromise while promoting scientific research on large datasets that aims to improve patient care, the implementation of technical solutions to simultaneously address the demands for data protection and utilization is mandatory. Here we present an overview of current and next-generation methods for federated, secure and privacy-preserving artificial intelligence with a focus on medical imaging applications, alongside potential attack vectors and future prospects in medical imaging and beyond. Medical imaging data is often subject to privacy and intellectual property restrictions. AI techniques can help out by offering tools like federated learning to bridge the gap between personal data protection and data utilisation for research and clinical routine, but these tools need to be secure.

/pdf/secure-privacy-preserving-and-federated-machine-learning-in-4jedzuai3s.pdf

Secure, privacy-preserving and federated machine learning in medical imaging

Current advances in research, development and application of artificial intelligence (AI) systems have yielded a far-reaching discourse on AI ethics. In consequence, a number of ethics guidelines have been released in recent years. These guidelines comprise normative principles and recommendations aimed to harness the "disruptive" potentials of new AI technologies. Designed as a comprehensive evaluation, this paper analyzes and compares these guidelines highlighting overlaps but also omissions. As a result, I give a detailed overview of the field of AI ethics. Finally, I also examine to what extent the respective ethical principles and values are implemented in the practice of research, development and application of AI systems - and how the effectiveness in the demands of AI ethics can be improved.

/pdf/the-ethics-of-ai-ethics-an-evaluation-of-guidelines-4aa8639hrc.pdf

The Ethics of AI Ethics -- An Evaluation of Guidelines

Artificial intelligence (AI) ethics is now a global topic of discussion in academic and policy circles. At least 84 public–private initiatives have produced statements describing high-level principles, values and other tenets to guide the ethical development, deployment and governance of AI. According to recent meta-analyses, AI ethics has seemingly converged on a set of principles that closely resemble the four classic principles of medical ethics. Despite the initial credibility granted to a principled approach to AI ethics by the connection to principles in medical ethics, there are reasons to be concerned about its future impact on AI development and governance. Significant differences exist between medicine and AI development that suggest a principled approach for the latter may not enjoy success comparable to the former. Compared to medicine, AI development lacks (1) common aims and fiduciary duties, (2) professional history and norms, (3) proven methods to translate principles into practice, and (4) robust legal and professional accountability mechanisms. These differences suggest we should not yet celebrate consensus around high-level principles that hide deep political and normative disagreement. AI ethics initiatives have seemingly converged on a set of principles that closely resemble the four classic principles of medical ethics. Despite this, Brent Mittelstadt highlights important differences between medical practice and AI development that suggest a principled approach may not work in the case of AI.

Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI

AI Ethics is now a global topic of discussion in academic and policy circles. At least 84 public-private initiatives have produced statements describing high-level principles, values, and other tenets to guide the ethical development, deployment, and governance of AI. According to recent meta-analyses, AI Ethics has seemingly converged on a set of principles that closely resemble the four classic principles of medical ethics. Despite the initial credibility granted to a principled approach to AI Ethics by the connection to principles in medical ethics, there are reasons to be concerned about its future impact on AI development and governance. Significant differences exist between medicine and AI development that suggest a principled approach in the latter may not enjoy success comparable to the former. Compared to medicine, AI development lacks (1) common aims and fiduciary duties, (2) professional history and norms, (3) proven methods to translate principles into practice, and (4) robust legal and professional accountability mechanisms. These differences suggest we should not yet celebrate consensus around high-level principles that hide deep political and normative disagreement.

The New Nature of Maps: Essays in the History of Cartography

In the past five years, private companies, research institutions and public sector organizations have issued principles and guidelines for ethical artificial intelligence (AI). However, despite an apparent agreement that AI should be ‘ethical’, there is debate about both what constitutes ‘ethical AI’ and which ethical requirements, technical standards and best practices are needed for its realization. To investigate whether a global agreement on these questions is emerging, we mapped and analysed the current corpus of principles and guidelines on ethical AI. Our results reveal a global convergence emerging around five ethical principles (transparency, justice and fairness, non-maleficence, responsibility and privacy), with substantive divergence in relation to how these principles are interpreted, why they are deemed important, what issue, domain or actors they pertain to, and how they should be implemented. Our findings highlight the importance of integrating guideline-development efforts with substantive ethical analysis and adequate implementation strategies.

The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines

In the last five years, private companies, research institutions as well as public sector organisations have issued principles and guidelines for ethical AI, yet there is debate about both what constitutes "ethical AI" and which ethical requirements, technical standards and best practices are needed for its realization. To investigate whether a global agreement on these questions is emerging, we mapped and analyzed the current corpus of principles and guidelines on ethical AI. Our results reveal a global convergence emerging around five ethical principles (transparency, justice and fairness, non-maleficence, responsibility and privacy), with substantive divergence in relation to how these principles are interpreted; why they are deemed important; what issue, domain or actors they pertain to; and how they should be implemented. Our findings highlight the importance of integrating guideline-development efforts with substantive ethical analysis and adequate implementation strategies.

Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelines.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is at the forefront of innovation in medicine. Researchers and AI developers have often claimed that "trust" is a critical determinant of the successful adoption of AI in medicine. Despite the pivotal role of trust and the emergence of an array of expert-informed guidelines on how to design and implement "trustworthy AI" in medicine, we found little common understanding across these guidelines on what constitutes user trust in AI and what the requirements are for its realization. In this article, we call for a conceptual framework of trust in health-related AI which is based not just on expert opinion, but first and foremost on sound empirical research and conceptual rigor. Only with a well-grounded and comprehensive understanding of the trust construct, we will be able to inform AI design and acceptance in medicine in a meaningful way.

What we talk about when we talk about trust: Theory of trust for AI in healthcare

We invited authors of selected Comments and Perspectives published in Nature Machine Intelligence in the latter half of 2019 and first half of 2020 to describe how their topic has developed, what their thoughts are about the challenges of 2020, and what they look forward to in 2021.

/pdf/ai-reflections-in-2020-44y65uga5j.pdf

AI reflections in 2020

Our chapter presents a scoping review of published scientific studies or case studies of scientific studies that utilise both citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices. Specifically, we selected studies where the authors had included at least a short discussion of the ethical issues encountered during the research process. Having conducted a search of five databases (IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and PubMed), we identified 631 potential results. Following abstract and title screening, and then full text eligibility assessment, we identified 34 published articles that matched our criteria. We then analysed the full text for these articles inductively and deductively, coding ethical issues into three main categories. These categories were autonomy and data privacy, data quality, and intellectual property. We also analysed the full text of these articles to see what strategies researchers took to resolve these ethical issues, as well as any legal implications raised. Following this analysis, our discussion provides recommendations for researchers who wish to integrate citizen scientists and Internet of Things devices into their research. First, all citizen science projects should integrate a data privacy protocol to protect the confidentiality of participants. Secondly, scientific researchers should consider any potential issues of data quality, including whether compromises might be required, before establishing a project. Finally, all intellectual property issues should be clarified both at the start of the project and during its lifecycle. Researchers should also consider any ethical issues that might flow from the use of commercially available Internet of Things devices for research.

Anna Jobin

Papers

The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines

Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelines.

What we talk about when we talk about trust: Theory of trust for AI in healthcare

AI reflections in 2020

Ethical issues with using Internet of Things devices in citizen science research: A scoping review