-
On the Societal Impact of Open Foundation Models
Authors:
Sayash Kapoor,
Rishi Bommasani,
Kevin Klyman,
Shayne Longpre,
Ashwin Ramaswami,
Peter Cihon,
Aspen Hopkins,
Kevin Bankston,
Stella Biderman,
Miranda Bogen,
Rumman Chowdhury,
Alex Engler,
Peter Henderson,
Yacine Jernite,
Seth Lazar,
Stefano Maffulli,
Alondra Nelson,
Joelle Pineau,
Aviya Skowron,
Dawn Song,
Victor Storchan,
Daniel Zhang,
Daniel E. Ho,
Percy Liang,
Arvind Narayanan
Abstract:
Foundation models are powerful technologies: how they are released publicly directly shapes their societal impact. In this position paper, we focus on open foundation models, defined here as those with broadly available model weights (e.g. Llama 2, Stable Diffusion XL). We identify five distinctive properties (e.g. greater customizability, poor monitoring) of open foundation models that lead to bo…
▽ More
Foundation models are powerful technologies: how they are released publicly directly shapes their societal impact. In this position paper, we focus on open foundation models, defined here as those with broadly available model weights (e.g. Llama 2, Stable Diffusion XL). We identify five distinctive properties (e.g. greater customizability, poor monitoring) of open foundation models that lead to both their benefits and risks. Open foundation models present significant benefits, with some caveats, that span innovation, competition, the distribution of decision-making power, and transparency. To understand their risks of misuse, we design a risk assessment framework for analyzing their marginal risk. Across several misuse vectors (e.g. cyberattacks, bioweapons), we find that current research is insufficient to effectively characterize the marginal risk of open foundation models relative to pre-existing technologies. The framework helps explain why the marginal risk is low in some cases, clarifies disagreements about misuse risks by revealing that past work has focused on different subsets of the framework with different assumptions, and articulates a way forward for more constructive debate. Overall, our work helps support a more grounded assessment of the societal impact of open foundation models by outlining what research is needed to empirically validate their theoretical benefits and risks.
△ Less
Submitted 27 February, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilot
Authors:
Sida Peng,
Eirini Kalliamvakou,
Peter Cihon,
Mert Demirer
Abstract:
Generative AI tools hold promise to increase human productivity. This paper presents results from a controlled experiment with GitHub Copilot, an AI pair programmer. Recruited software developers were asked to implement an HTTP server in JavaScript as quickly as possible. The treatment group, with access to the AI pair programmer, completed the task 55.8% faster than the control group. Observed he…
▽ More
Generative AI tools hold promise to increase human productivity. This paper presents results from a controlled experiment with GitHub Copilot, an AI pair programmer. Recruited software developers were asked to implement an HTTP server in JavaScript as quickly as possible. The treatment group, with access to the AI pair programmer, completed the task 55.8% faster than the control group. Observed heterogenous effects show promise for AI pair programmers to help people transition into software development careers.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
-
AI Certification: Advancing Ethical Practice by Reducing Information Asymmetries
Authors:
Peter Cihon,
Moritz J. Kleinaltenkamp,
Jonas Schuett,
Seth D. Baum
Abstract:
As artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly deployed, principles for ethical AI are also proliferating. Certification offers a method to both incentivize adoption of these principles and substantiate that they have been implemented in practice. This paper draws from management literature on certification and reviews current AI certification programs and proposals. Successful programs…
▽ More
As artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly deployed, principles for ethical AI are also proliferating. Certification offers a method to both incentivize adoption of these principles and substantiate that they have been implemented in practice. This paper draws from management literature on certification and reviews current AI certification programs and proposals. Successful programs rely on both emerging technical methods and specific design considerations. In order to avoid two common failures of certification, program designs should ensure that the symbol of the certification is substantially implemented in practice and that the program achieves its stated goals. The review indicates that the field currently focuses on self-certification and third-party certification of systems, individuals, and organizations - to the exclusion of process management certifications. Additionally, the paper considers prospects for future AI certification programs. Ongoing changes in AI technology suggest that AI certification regimes should be designed to emphasize governance criteria of enduring value, such as ethics training for AI developers, and to adjust technical criteria as the technology changes. Overall, certification can play a valuable mix in the portfolio of AI governance tools.
△ Less
Submitted 20 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
Tweeting for the Cause: Network analysis of UK petition sharing
Authors:
Peter Cihon,
Taha Yasseri,
Scott Hale,
Helen Margetts
Abstract:
Online government petitions represent a new data-rich mode of political participation. This work examines the thus far understudied dynamics of sharing petitions on social media in order to garner signatures and, ultimately, a government response. Using 20 months of Twitter data comprising over 1 million tweets linking to a petition, we perform analyses of networks constructed of petitions and sup…
▽ More
Online government petitions represent a new data-rich mode of political participation. This work examines the thus far understudied dynamics of sharing petitions on social media in order to garner signatures and, ultimately, a government response. Using 20 months of Twitter data comprising over 1 million tweets linking to a petition, we perform analyses of networks constructed of petitions and supporters on Twitter, revealing implicit social dynamics therein. We find that Twitter users do not exclusively share petitions on one issue nor do they share exclusively popular petitions. Among the over 240,000 Twitter users, we find latent support groups, with the most central users primarily being politically active "average" individuals. Twitter as a platform for sharing government petitions, thus, appears to hold potential to foster the creation of and coordination among a new form of latent support interest groups online.
△ Less
Submitted 1 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
-
Should Artificial Intelligence Governance be Centralised? Design Lessons from History
Authors:
Peter Cihon,
Matthijs M. Maas,
Luke Kemp
Abstract:
Can effective international governance for artificial intelligence remain fragmented, or is there a need for a centralised international organisation for AI? We draw on the history of other international regimes to identify advantages and disadvantages in centralising AI governance. Some considerations, such as efficiency and political power, speak in favour of centralisation. Conversely, the risk…
▽ More
Can effective international governance for artificial intelligence remain fragmented, or is there a need for a centralised international organisation for AI? We draw on the history of other international regimes to identify advantages and disadvantages in centralising AI governance. Some considerations, such as efficiency and political power, speak in favour of centralisation. Conversely, the risk of creating a slow and brittle institution speaks against it, as does the difficulty in securing participation while creating stringent rules. Other considerations depend on the specific design of a centralised institution. A well-designed body may be able to deter forum shopping and ensure policy coordination. However, forum shopping can be beneficial and a fragmented landscape of institutions can be self-organising. Centralisation entails trade-offs and the details matter. We conclude with two core recommendations. First, the outcome will depend on the exact design of a central institution. A well-designed centralised regime covering a set of coherent issues could be beneficial. But locking-in an inadequate structure may pose a fate worse than fragmentation. Second, for now fragmentation will likely persist. This should be closely monitored to see if it is self-organising or simply inadequate.
△ Less
Submitted 10 January, 2020;
originally announced January 2020.
-
The Windfall Clause: Distributing the Benefits of AI for the Common Good
Authors:
Cullen O'Keefe,
Peter Cihon,
Ben Garfinkel,
Carrick Flynn,
Jade Leung,
Allan Dafoe
Abstract:
As the transformative potential of AI has become increasingly salient as a matter of public and political interest, there has been growing discussion about the need to ensure that AI broadly benefits humanity. This in turn has spurred debate on the social responsibilities of large technology companies to serve the interests of society at large. In response, ethical principles and codes of conduct…
▽ More
As the transformative potential of AI has become increasingly salient as a matter of public and political interest, there has been growing discussion about the need to ensure that AI broadly benefits humanity. This in turn has spurred debate on the social responsibilities of large technology companies to serve the interests of society at large. In response, ethical principles and codes of conduct have been proposed to meet the escalating demand for this responsibility to be taken seriously. As yet, however, few institutional innovations have been suggested to translate this responsibility into legal commitments which apply to companies positioned to reap large financial gains from the development and use of AI. This paper offers one potentially attractive tool for addressing such issues: the Windfall Clause, which is an ex ante commitment by AI firms to donate a significant amount of any eventual extremely large profits. By this we mean an early commitment that profits that a firm could not earn without achieving fundamental, economically transformative breakthroughs in AI capabilities will be donated to benefit humanity broadly, with particular attention towards mitigating any downsides from deployment of windfall-generating AI.
△ Less
Submitted 24 January, 2020; v1 submitted 25 December, 2019;
originally announced December 2019.
-
A Biased Review of Biases in Twitter Studies on Political Collective Action
Authors:
Peter Cihon,
Taha Yasseri
Abstract:
In recent years researchers have gravitated to social media platforms, especially Twitter, as fertile ground for empirical analysis of social phenomena. Social media provides researchers access to trace data of interactions and discourse that once went unrecorded in the offline world. Researchers have sought to use these data to explain social phenomena both particular to social media and applicab…
▽ More
In recent years researchers have gravitated to social media platforms, especially Twitter, as fertile ground for empirical analysis of social phenomena. Social media provides researchers access to trace data of interactions and discourse that once went unrecorded in the offline world. Researchers have sought to use these data to explain social phenomena both particular to social media and applicable to the broader social world. This paper offers a minireview of Twitter-based research on political crowd behavior. This literature offers insight into particular social phenomena on Twitter, but often fails to use standardized methods that permit interpretation beyond individual studies. Moreover, the literature fails to ground methodologies and results in social or political theory, divorcing empirical research from the theory needed to interpret it. Rather, papers focus primarily on methodological innovations for social media analyses, but these too often fail to sufficiently demonstrate the validity of such methodologies. This minireview considers a small number of selected papers; we analyze their (often lack of) theoretical approaches, review their methodological innovations, and offer suggestions as to the relevance of their results for political scientists and sociologists.
△ Less
Submitted 16 May, 2016;
originally announced May 2016.
