Ethical Challenges in AI Decision-Making Systems
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Decision-making powered by artificial intelligence (AI) has become pervasive in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, criminal justice, finance, and human resource management. While AI systems promise greater efficiency, consistency, and objectivity, they introduce significant ethical risks including algorithmic bias, opacity, accountability gaps, and privacy erosion. This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of these challenges, examining the origins and manifestations of bias, the technical and ethical imperatives for explainability, responsibility diffusion in complex AI supply chains, and tensions between data-driven innovation and fundamental rights. It evaluates major regulatory responses, notably the European Union AI Act, and proposes a multi-stakeholder ethical governance framework. The study argues that responsible AI deployment requires continuous co-evolution of technical solutions, organizational practices, and adaptive regulation to ensure fairness, transparency, and human-centric outcomes.
Downloads
References
J. Angwin, J. Larson, S. Mattu, and L. Kirchner, “Machine bias,” ProPublica, May 23, 2016.
J. Buolamwini and T. Gebru, “Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification,” in Proc. 1st Conf. Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, 2018, pp. 77–91.
A. Jobin, M. Ienca, and E. Vayena, “The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines,” Nat. Mach. Intell., vol. 1, no. 9, pp. 389–399, Sep. 2019.
S. Barocas, M. Hardt, and A. Narayanan, Fairness and Machine Learning: Limitations and Opportunities. MIT Press, 2023.
A. Chouldechova, “Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments,” Big Data, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 153–163, 2017.
J. Kleinberg, S. Mullainathan, and M. Raghavan, “Inherent trade-offs in the fair determination of risk scores,” in Proc. 8th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conf., 2017, pp. 1–23.
B. D. Mittelstadt, P. Allo, M. Taddeo, S. Wachter, and L. Floridi, “The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate,” Big Data Soc., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–21, 2016.
European Union, “General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR),” Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Apr. 2016.
M. T. Ribeiro, S. Singh, and C. Guestrin, “‘Why should I trust you?’: Explaining the predictions of any classifier,” in Proc. 22nd ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowl. Discovery Data Mining, 2016, pp. 1135–1144.
S. M. Lundberg and S.-I. Lee, “A unified approach to interpreting model predictions,” in Proc. 31st Int. Conf. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. (NeurIPS), 2017, pp. 4765–4774.
S. Wachter, B. Mittelstadt, and C. Russell, “Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: Automated decisions and the GDPR,” Harv. J. Law Technol., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 841–887, 2018.
S. Zuboff, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs, 2019.
European Parliament and Council, “Artificial Intelligence Act,” Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, June 2024.
D. Leslie, “Understanding artificial intelligence ethics and safety,” The Alan Turing Institute, London, UK, Tech. Rep., 2019.
C. Rudin, “Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead,” Nat. Mach. Intell., vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 206–215, 2019.
T. Gebru et al., “Datasheets for datasets,” Commun. ACM, vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 86–92, Dec. 2021.
M. Mitchell et al., “Model cards for model reporting,” in Proc. Conf. Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT)*, 2019, pp. 220–229.
A. D. Selbst, D. Boyd, S. A. Friedler, S. Venkatasubramanian, and J. Vertesi, “Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems,” in Proc. Conf. Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT)*, 2019, pp. 59–68.
P. B. de Laat, “The ethics of algorithms: A critical review,” Ethics Inf. Technol., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 411–425, 2021.
High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence, “Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI,” European Commission, Brussels, Apr. 2019.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in our journal are licensed under CC-BY 4.0, which permits authors to retain copyright of their work. This license allows for unrestricted use, sharing, and reproduction of the articles, provided that proper credit is given to the original authors and the source.