Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34149122›Full record

ArticleSociety2021

Towards an Equitable Digital Society: Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR).

Karen Elliott, Rob Price, Patricia Shaw, Tasos Spiliotopoulos, Magdalene Ng, Kovila Coopamootoo, Aad van Moorsel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Karen ElliottSchool of Computing & Business School, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, The Helix, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2455-0475
Rob Pricehttp://CorporateDigitalResponsibility.net (CDR), Alchemmy, 52-54 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6RL UK.
Patricia ShawBeyond Reach Consulting Ltd, 139 Furlong Road, Bolton-Upon-Dearne, Rotherham, S63 8HD UK.
Tasos SpiliotopoulosSchool of Computing & Business School, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, The Helix, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9573-8360
Magdalene NgSchool of Computing & Business School, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, The Helix, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9914-4586
Kovila CoopamootooSchool of Computing & Business School, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, The Helix, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG UK.
Aad van MoorselSchool of Computing & Business School, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, The Helix, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7233-6943

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the digital era, we witness the increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) to solve problems, while improving productivity and efficiency. Yet, inevitably costs are involved with delegating power to algorithmically based systems, some of whose workings are opaque and unobservable and thus termed the "black box". Central to understanding the "black box" is to acknowledge that the algorithm is not mendaciously undertaking this action; it is simply using the recombination afforded to scaled computable machine learning algorithms. But an algorithm with arbitrary precision can easily reconstruct those characteristics and make life-changing decisions, particularly in financial services (credit scoring, risk assessment, etc.), and it could be difficult to reconstruct, if this was done in a fair manner reflecting the values of society. If we permit AI to make life-changing decisions, what are the opportunity costs, data trade-offs, and implications for social, economic, technical, legal, and environmental systems? We find that over 160 ethical AI principles exist, advocating organisations to act responsibly to avoid causing digital societal harms. This maelstrom of guidance, none of which is compulsory, serves to confuse, as opposed to guide. We need to think carefully about how we implement these algorithms, the delegation of decisions and data usage, in the absence of human oversight and AI governance. The paper seeks to harmonise and align approaches, illustrating the opportunities and threats of AI, while raising awareness of Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR) as a potential collaborative mechanism to demystify governance complexity and to establish an equitable digital society.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligence (AI) governanceComplexityCorporate Digital ResponsibilityDigital ethics and trustEquitable digital societyFinancial technology (FinTech)

Identifiers

PMID34149122
PMCPMC8202049

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.