Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Towards a Responsible AI Development Lifecycle: Lessons From Information Security

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2203.02958 v1 pith:2A3XVNEY submitted 2022-03-06 cs.AI cs.HCcs.LG

classification cs.AIcs.HCcs.LG
keywords systemsdevelopmentinformationartificialdevelopingexplainabilityfairnessfield
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Legislation and public sentiment throughout the world have promoted fairness metrics, explainability, and interpretability as prescriptions for the responsible development of ethical artificial intelligence systems. Despite the importance of these three pillars in the foundation of the field, they can be challenging to operationalize and attempts to solve the problems in production environments often feel Sisyphean. This difficulty stems from a number of factors: fairness metrics are computationally difficult to incorporate into training and rarely alleviate all of the harms perpetrated by these systems. Interpretability and explainability can be gamed to appear fair, may inadvertently reduce the privacy of personal information contained in training data, and increase user confidence in predictions -- even when the explanations are wrong. In this work, we propose a framework for responsibly developing artificial intelligence systems by incorporating lessons from the field of information security and the secure development lifecycle to overcome challenges associated with protecting users in adversarial settings. In particular, we propose leveraging the concepts of threat modeling, design review, penetration testing, and incident response in the context of developing AI systems as ways to resolve shortcomings in the aforementioned methods.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Generative AI in Financial Institution: A Global Survey of Opportunities, Threats, and Regulation

    cs.CR 2025-04 unverdicted

    A survey of generative AI applications, cyber threats, and regulatory approaches in global finance, with practical recommendations but no new empirical or theoretical contribution.

Pith tools