research-article

The relationship between trust in AI and trustworthy machine learning technologies

Authors:

Kovila Coopamootoo,

Carlos Gonzalez Zelaya, and

Aad van MoorselAuthors Info & Claims

FAT* '20: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

January 2020

Pages 272 - 283

https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372834

Published: 27 January 2020 Publication History

Abstract

To design and develop AI-based systems that users and the larger public can justifiably trust, one needs to understand how machine learning technologies impact trust. To guide the design and implementation of trusted AI-based systems, this paper provides a systematic approach to relate considerations about trust from the social sciences to trustworthiness technologies proposed for AI-based services and products. We start from the ABI+ (Ability, Benevolence, Integrity, Predictability) framework augmented with a recently proposed mapping of ABI+ on qualities of technologies that support trust. We consider four categories of trustworthiness technologies for machine learning, namely these for Fairness, Explainability, Auditability and Safety (FEAS) and discuss if and how these support the required qualities. Moreover, trust can be impacted throughout the life cycle of AI-based systems, and we therefore introduce the concept of Chain of Trust to discuss trustworthiness technologies in all stages of the life cycle. In so doing we establish the ways in which machine learning technologies support trusted AI-based systems. Finally, FEAS has obvious relations with known frameworks and therefore we relate FEAS to a variety of international 'principled AI' policy and technology frameworks that have emerged in recent years.

References

[1]

Martin Abadi, Andy Chu, Ian Goodfellow, H Brendan McMahan, Ilya Mironov, Kunal Talwar, and Li Zhang. 2016. Deep learning with differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. ACM, 308--318.

Digital Library

[2]

Eleanor Ainy, Pierre Bourhis, Susan B Davidson, Daniel Deutch, and Tova Milo. 2015. Approximated summarization of data provenance. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. ACM, 483--492.

Digital Library

[3]

Mhairi Aitken, Sarah Cunningham-Burley, and Claudia Pagliari. 2016. Moving from trust to trustworthiness: Experiences of public engagement in the Scottish Health Informatics Programme. Science and Public Policy 43, 5 (2016), 713--723.

[4]

Naomi S Altman. 1992. An introduction to kernel and nearest-neighbor nonparametric regression. The American Statistician 46, 3 (1992), 175--185.

[5]

Peter Andras, Lukas Esterle, Michael Guckert, The Anh Han, Peter R Lewis, Kristina Milanovic, Terry Payne, Cedric Perret, Jeremy Pitt, Simon T Powers, and others. 2018. Trusting Intelligent Machines: Deepening Trust Within Socio-Technical Systems. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 37, 4 (2018), 76--83.

[6]

Susan Athey and Guido W Imbens. 2015. Machine learning methods for estimating heterogeneous causal effects. stat 1050, 5 (2015), 1--26.

[7]

A Avizienis, J. Laprie, B Randell, and C Landwehr. 2004. Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing 1, 1 (1 2004), 11--33.

Digital Library

[8]

Akanksha Baid, Wentao Wu, Chong Sun, AnHai Doan, and Jeffrey F Naughton. 2015. On Debugging Non-Answers in Keyword Search Systems. In EDBT. 37--48.

[9]

Robert Bartlett, Adair Morse, Richard Stanton, and Nancy Wallace. 2018. Consumer-Lending Discrimination in the Era of FinTech. Unpublished working paper. University of California, Berkeley (2018).

[10]

Nicole Bidoit, Melanie Herschel, and Katerina Tzompanaki. 2014. Query-based why-not provenance with nedexplain. In Extending database technology (EDBT).

[11]

Battista Biggio, Igino Corona, Giorgio Fumera, Giorgio Giacinto, and Fabio Roli. 2011. Bagging classifiers for fighting poisoning attacks in adversarial classification tasks. In International workshop on multiple classifier systems. Springer, 350--359.

Digital Library

[12]

Battista Biggio, Igino Corona, Blaine Nelson, Benjamin I P Rubinstein, Davide Maiorca, Giorgio Fumera, Giorgio Giacinto, and Fabio Roli. 2014. Security evaluation of support vector machines in adversarial environments. In Support Vector Machines Applications. Springer, 105--153.

[13]

Battista Biggio, Giorgio Fumera, and Fabio Roli. 2010. Multiple classifier systems for robust classifier design in adversarial environments. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics 1, 1-4 (2010), 27--41.

[14]

Battista Biggio, Giorgio Fumera, and Fabio Roli. 2014. Security evaluation of pattern classifiers under attack. IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering 26, 4 (2014), 984--996.

[15]

Battista Biggio, Blaine Nelson, and Pavel Laskov. 2011. Support vector machines under adversarial label noise. In Asian Conference on Machine Learning. 97--112.

[16]

Matt Bishop. 2007. About penetration testing. IEEE Security & Privacy 5, 6 (2007), 84--87.

Digital Library

[17]

Avrim L Blum and Pat Langley. 1997. Selection of relevant features and examples in machine learning. Artificial Intelligence 97, 1-2 (1997), 245--271.

Digital Library

[18]

Peter Buneman, Adriane Chapman, and James Cheney. 2006. Provenance management in curated databases. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data. ACM, 539--550.

Digital Library

[19]

Jie Cai, Jiawei Luo, Shulin Wang, and Sheng Yang. 2018. Feature selection in machine learning: A new perspective. Neurocomputing 300 (2018), 70--79.

[20]

Adriane P Chapman, Hosagrahar V Jagadish, and Prakash Ramanan. 2008. Efficient provenance storage. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data. ACM, 993--1006.

Digital Library

[21]

James Cheney, Amal Ahmed, and Umut A Acar. 2007. Provenance as dependency analysis. In International Symposium on Database Programming Languages. Springer, 138--152.

[22]

Erika Chin, Adrienne Porter Felt, Vyas Sekar, and David Wagner. 2012. Measuring user confidence in smartphone security and privacy. In Proceedings of the eighth symposium on usable privacy and security. ACM, 1.

Digital Library

[23]

Sam Corbett-Davies and Sharad Goel. 2018. The Measure and Mismeasure of Fairness: A Critical Review of Fair Machine Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.00023 (2018).

[24]

Sarah Cunningham-Burley. 2006. Public knowledge and public trust. Public Health Genomics 9, 3 (2006), 204--210.

[25]

Brian d'Alessandro, Cathy O'Neil, and Tom LaGatta. 2017. Conscientious classification: A data scientist's guide to discrimination-aware classification. Big data 5, 2 (2017), 120--134.

[26]

Ambra Demontis, Marco Melis, Battista Biggio, Davide Maiorca, Daniel Arp, Konrad Rieck, Igino Corona, Giorgio Giacinto, and Fabio Roli. 2017. Yes, machine learning can be more secure! a case study on android malware detection. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing (2017).

[27]

Daniel Deutch, Nave Frost, and Amir Gilad. 2016. Nlprov: Natural language provenance. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 9, 13 (2016), 1537--1540.

Digital Library

[28]

Daniel Deutch, Amir Gilad, and Yuval Moskovitch. 2015. Selective provenance for datalog programs using top-k queries. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 8, 12 (2015), 1394--1405.

Digital Library

[29]

Graham Dietz and Deanne N Den Hartog. 2006. Measuring trust inside organisations. Personnel review 35, 5 (2006), 557--588.

[30]

Graham Dietz and Nicole Gillespie. 2012. Recovery of Trust: Case Studies of Organisational Failures and Trust Repair. Vol. 5. Institute of Business Ethics London.

[31]

Finale Doshi-Velez and Been Kim. 2017. Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08608 (2017).

[32]

Harris Drucker, Donghui Wu, and Vladimir N Vapnik. 1999. Support vector machines for spam categorization. IEEE Transactions on Neural networks 10, 5 (1999), 1048--1054.

Digital Library

[33]

Rehab Duwairi and Mahmoud El-Orfali. 2014. A study of the effects of preprocessing strategies on sentiment analysis for Arabic text. Journal of Information Science 40, 4 (2014), 501--513.

Digital Library

[34]

Cynthia Dwork. 2011. Differential privacy. Encyclopedia of Cryptography and Security (2011), 338--340.

[35]

Cynthia Dwork, Moritz Hardt, Toniann Pitassi, Omer Reingold, and Richard Zemel. 2012. Fairness through awareness. In Proceedings of the 3rd innovations in theoretical computer science conference. ACM, 214--226.

Digital Library

[36]

Dumitru Erhan, Yoshua Bengio, Aaron Courville, Pierre-Antoine Manzagol, Pascal Vincent, and Samy Bengio. 2010. Why does unsupervised pre-training help deep learning? Journal of Machine Learning Research 11, Feb (2010), 625--660.

Digital Library

[37]

Michael Feldman, Sorelle A Friedler, John Moeller, Carlos Scheidegger, and Suresh Venkatasubramanian. 2015. Certifying and removing disparate impact. In Proceedings of the 21th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 259--268.

Digital Library

[38]

Jessica Fjeld, Hannah Hilligoss, Nele Achten, Maia Levy Daniel, Sally Kagay, and Joshua Feldman. 2019. Principled Artificial Intelligence: Mapping Consensus and Divergence in Ethical and Rights-Based Approaches. (2019). https://aihr.cyber.harvard.edu/

[39]

Zahra Ghodsi, Tianyu Gu, and Siddharth Garg. 2017. Safetynets: Verifiable execution of deep neural networks on an untrusted cloud. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 4672--4681.

[40]

Nicole Gillespie and Graham Dietz. 2009. Trust repair after an organization-level failure. Academy of Management Review 34, 1 (2009), 127--145.

[41]

Carlos Adriano Gonçalves, Celia Talma Gonçalves, Rui Camacho, and Eugenio C Oliveira. 2010. The impact of Pre-Processing on the Classification of MEDLINE Documents. Pattern Recognition in Information Systems, Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Information Systems, PRIS 2010, In conjunction with ICEIS 2010 (2010), 10.

[42]

Carlos Vladimiro González Zelaya. 2019. Towards Explaining the Effects of Data Preprocessing on Machine Learning. 2019 IEEE 35th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) (2019).

[43]

Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Salvatore Ruggieri, Franco Turini, Fosca Giannotti, and Dino Pedreschi. 2018. A survey of methods for explaining black box models. ACM computing surveys (CSUR) 51, 5 (2018), 93.

[44]

Himanshu Gupta, Sameep Mehta, Sandeep Hans, Bapi Chatterjee, Pranay Lohia, and C Rajmohan. 2017. Provenance in context of Hadoop as a Service (HaaS)-State of the Art and Research Directions. In 2017 IEEE 10th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD). IEEE, 680--683.

[45]

Rob Hagendijk and Alan Irwin. 2006. Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe. Minerva 44, 2 (2006), 167--184.

[46]

Moritz Hardt, Eric Price, Nati Srebro, and others. 2016. Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 3315--3323.

[47]

Weiwei Hu and Ying Tan. 2017. Generating adversarial malware examples for black-box attacks based on GAN. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.05983 (2017).

[48]

Anil K Jain, M Narasimha Murty, and Patrick J Flynn. 1999. Data clustering: a review. ACM computing surveys (CSUR) 31, 3 (1999), 264--323.

[49]

Matthew Joseph, Michael Kearns, Jamie Morgenstern, Seth Neel, and Aaron Roth. 2016. Rawlsian Fairness for Machine Learning. FATML (2016), 1--26. http://arxiv.org/abs/1610.09559

[50]

Toshihiro Kamishima, Shotaro Akaho, Hideki Asoh, and Jun Sakuma. 2012. Fairness-aware classifier with prejudice remover regularizer. In Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Springer, 35--50.

[51]

Been Kim, Elena Glassman, Brittney Johnson, and Julie Shah. 2015. iBCM: Interactive Bayesian case model empowering humans via intuitive interaction. (2015).

[52]

Sabine Theresia Koszegi. 2019. High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence.

[53]

Alex Krizhevsky, Geoffrey Hinton, and others. 2009. Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images. Technical Report. Citeseer.

[54]

Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E Hinton. 2012. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 1097--1105.

[55]

Matt J Kusner, Joshua Loftus, Chris Russell, and Ricardo Silva. 2017. Counterfactual fairness. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 4066--4076.

[56]

Ricky Laishram and Vir Virander Phoha. 2016. Curie: A method for protecting SVM Classifier from Poisoning Attack. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.01584 (2016).

[57]

Himabindu Lakkaraju, Ece Kamar, Rich Caruana, and Jure Leskovec. 2017. Interpretable & Explorable Approximations of Black Box Models. (7 2017).

[58]

Pavel Laskov and Marius Kloft. 2009. A framework for quantitative security analysis of machine learning. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM workshop on Security and artificial intelligence. ACM, 1--4.

Digital Library

[59]

Xin Li, Traci J Hess, and Joseph S Valacich. 2008. Why do we trust new technology? A study of initial trust formation with organizational information systems. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 17, 1 (2008), 39--71.

Digital Library

[60]

Zachary C Lipton. 2016. The mythos of model interpretability. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.03490 (2016).

[61]

Qiang Liu, Pan Li, Wentao Zhao, Wei Cai, Shui Yu, and Victor C M Leung. 2018. A survey on security threats and defensive techniques of machine learning: A data driven view. IEEE access 6 (2018), 12103--12117.

[62]

Yin Lou, Rich Caruana, Johannes Gehrke, and Giles Hooker. 2013. Accurate intelligible models with pairwise interactions. Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining - KDD '13 (2013), 623.

Digital Library

[63]

Kristian Lum and James Johndrow. 2016. A statistical framework for fair predictive algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.08077 (2016).

[64]

Scott M Lundberg and Su-In Lee. 2017. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 4765--4774.

[65]

Binh Thanh Luong, Salvatore Ruggieri, and Franco Turini. 2011. k-NN as an implementation of situation testing for discrimination discovery and prevention. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, 502--510.

Digital Library

[66]

Peter Macko, Daniel Margo, and Margo Seltzer. 2013. Local clustering in provenance graphs. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge Management. ACM, 835--840.

Digital Library

[67]

Roger C Mayer, James H Davis, and F David Schoorman. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review 20, 3 (1995), 709--734.

[68]

Donald Michie, David J Spiegelhalter, C C Taylor, and others. 1994. Machine learning. Neural and Statistical Classification 13 (1994).

[69]

Grégoire Montavon, Wojciech Samek, and Klaus-Robert Müller. 2018. Methods for interpreting and understanding deep neural networks. Digital Signal Processing 73 (2018), 1--15.

[70]

Arvind Narayanan. 2018. Translation tutorial: 21 fairness definitions and their politics. In Proc. Conf. Fairness Accountability Transp., New York, USA.

[71]

Olga Ohrimenko, Felix Schuster, Cédric Fournet, Aastha Mehta, Sebastian Nowozin, Kapil Vaswani, and Manuel Costa. 2016. Oblivious multi-party machine learning on trusted processors. In 25th ${$USENIX$}$ Security Symposium (${$USENIX$}$ Security 16). 619--636.

[72]

Nicolas Papernot, Patrick McDaniel, Arunesh Sinha, and Michael Wellman. 2016. Towards the science of security and privacy in machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.03814 (2016).

[73]

Nicolas Papernot, Patrick McDaniel, Arunesh Sinha, and Michael P Wellman. 2018. SoK: Security and privacy in machine learning. In 2018 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P). IEEE, 399--414.

[74]

Christopher Ré and Dan Suciu. 2008. Approximate lineage for probabilistic databases. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 1, 1 (2008), 797--808.

Digital Library

[75]

Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. 2016. Why should i trust you?: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, 1135--1144.

Digital Library

[76]

Ronald L Rivest. 1987. Learning decision lists. Machine learning 2, 3 (1987), 229--246.

[77]

Andrea Romei and Salvatore Ruggieri. 2014. A multidisciplinary survey on discrimination analysis. The Knowledge Engineering Review 29, 5 (2014), 582--638.

[78]

Benjamin I P Rubinstein, Blaine Nelson, Ling Huang, Anthony D Joseph, Shinghon Lau, Satish Rao, Nina Taft, and J Doug Tygar. 2009. Antidote: understanding and defending against poisoning of anomaly detectors. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement. ACM, 1--14.

Digital Library

[79]

Reza Shokri and Vitaly Shmatikov. 2015. Privacy-preserving deep learning. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security. ACM, 1310--1321.

[80]

Avanti Shrikumar, Peyton Greenside, and Anshul Kundaje. 2017. Learning important features through propagating activation differences. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning-Volume 70. JMLR. org, 3145--3153.

Digital Library

[81]

Keng Siau and Weiyu Wang. 2018. Building trust in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and robotics. Cutter Business Technology Journal 31, 2 (2018), 47--53.

[82]

Jatinder Singh, Jennifer Cobbe, and Chris Norval. 2018. Decision Provenance: Harnessing data flow for accountable systems. IEEE Access 7 (2018), 6562--6574.

[83]

Ilya Sutskever, Oriol Vinyals, and Quoc V Le. 2014. Sequence to sequence learning with neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 3104--3112.

[84]

Richard S Sutton and Andrew G Barto. 2018. Reinforcement learning: An introduction. MIT press.

[85]

Christian Szegedy, Wojciech Zaremba, Ilya Sutskever, Joan Bruna, Dumitru Erhan, Ian Goodfellow, and Rob Fergus. 2013. Intriguing properties of neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6199 (2013).

[86]

Alper Kursat Uysal and Serkan Gunal. 2014. The impact of preprocessing on text classification. Information Processing and Management 50, 1 (2014), 104--112.

Digital Library

[87]

Michael Walfish and Andrew J Blumberg. 2015. Verifying computations without reexecuting them. Commun. ACM 58, 2 (2015), 74--84.

Digital Library

[88]

Jess Whittlestone, Rune Nyrup, Anna Alexandrova, and Stephen Cave. 2019. The Role and Limits of Principles in AI Ethics: Towards a Focus on Tensions. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society, Honolulu, HI, USA. 27--28.

Digital Library

[89]

Simon N Wood. 2003. Thin plate regression splines. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) 65, 1 (2003), 95--114.

[90]

Eugene Wu, Samuel Madden, and Michael Stonebraker. 2013. Subzero: a finegrained lineage system for scientific databases. In 2013 IEEE 29th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE). IEEE, 865--876.

Digital Library

[91]

Brian Wynne. 1992. Misunderstood misunderstanding: social identities and public uptake of science. Public understanding of science 1, 3 (1992), 281--304.

[92]

Brian Wynne. 1996. A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. Risk, environment and modernity: Towards a new ecology 40 (1996), 44.

[93]

Brian Wynne. 2006. Public engagement as a means of restoring public trust in science-hitting the notes, but missing the music? Public Health Genomics 9, 3 (2006), 211--220.

[94]

Yulai Xie, Kiran-Kumar Muniswamy-Reddy, Dan Feng, Yan Li, and Darrell D E Long. 2013. Evaluation of a hybrid approach for efficient provenance storage. ACM Transactions on Storage (TOS) 9, 4 (2013), 14.

[95]

Masaki Yuki, William W Maddux, Marilynn B Brewer, and Kosuke Takemura. 2005. Cross-cultural differences in relationship-and group-based trust. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 31, 1 (2005), 48--62.

[96]

Muhammad Bilal Zafar. 2019. Discrimination in Algorithmic Decision Making: From Principles to Measures and Mechanisms. (2019).

[97]

Muhammad Bilal Zafar, Isabel Valera, Manuel Gomez Rodriguez, and Krishna P Gummadi. 2017. Fairness beyond disparate treatment & disparate impact: Learning classification without disparate mistreatment. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 1171--1180.

Digital Library

[98]

Indrė Žliobait\.e. 2017. Measuring discrimination in algorithmic decision making. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 31, 4 (2017), 1060--1089.

Digital Library

Cited By

Rosales AMalanowska AKoohpayeh Araghi TKuribayashi MKowalczyk MBlanche-Tarragó DMazurczyk WMegías D(2024)Trustworthiness and explainability of a watermarking and machine learning-based system for image modification detection to combat disinformationProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security10.1145/3664476.3670934(1-10)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3664476.3670934
Ge YLiu SFu ZTan JLi ZXu SLi YXian YZhang Y(2024)A Survey on Trustworthy Recommender SystemsACM Transactions on Recommender Systems10.1145/3652891Online publication date: 13-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1145/3652891
Fleiß JBäck EThalmann S(2024)Mitigating Algorithm Aversion in Recruiting: A Study on Explainable AI for Conversational AgentsACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems10.1145/3645057.364506255:1(56-87)Online publication date: 6-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3645057.3645062
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

The relationship between trust in AI and trustworthy machine learning technologies

Recommendations

How Explainability Contributes to Trust in AI
FAccT '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

We provide a philosophical explanation of the relation between artificial intelligence (AI) explainability and trust in AI, providing a case for expressions, such as “explainability fosters trust in AI,” that commonly appear in the literature. This ...
Read More
National culture and consumer trust in e-commerce

The article examines how culture influences trust in e-commerce.Disposition to trust is a significant predictor of perceived trustworthiness.Disposition to trust mediates effects between national culture and trustworthiness.Long-term orientation and ...
Read More
Toward a Unified Theory of Learned Trust in Interpersonal and Human-Machine Interactions

A proposal for a unified theory of learned trust implemented in a cognitive architecture is presented. The theory is instantiated as a computational cognitive model of learned trust that integrates several seemingly unrelated categories of findings from ...
Read More

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

FAT* '20: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

January 2020

895 pages

ISBN:9781450369367

DOI:10.1145/3351095

Copyright © 2020 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

ACM: Association for Computing Machinery

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 January 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council

Conference

FAT* '20

Sponsor:

ACM

FAT* '20: Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency

January 27 - 30, 2020

Barcelona, Spain

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

36
Total Citations
View Citations
5,548
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)1,160
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)101

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Rosales AMalanowska AKoohpayeh Araghi TKuribayashi MKowalczyk MBlanche-Tarragó DMazurczyk WMegías D(2024)Trustworthiness and explainability of a watermarking and machine learning-based system for image modification detection to combat disinformationProceedings of the 19th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security10.1145/3664476.3670934(1-10)Online publication date: 30-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3664476.3670934
Ge YLiu SFu ZTan JLi ZXu SLi YXian YZhang Y(2024)A Survey on Trustworthy Recommender SystemsACM Transactions on Recommender Systems10.1145/3652891Online publication date: 13-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1145/3652891
Fleiß JBäck EThalmann S(2024)Mitigating Algorithm Aversion in Recruiting: A Study on Explainable AI for Conversational AgentsACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems10.1145/3645057.364506255:1(56-87)Online publication date: 6-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3645057.3645062
Kollerup NWester JSkov Mvan Berkel N(2024)How Can I Signal You To Trust Me: Investigating AI Trust Signalling in Clinical Self-AssessmentsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661612(525-540)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643834.3661612
Manzini AKeeling GMarchal NMcKee KRieser VGabriel I(2024)Should Users Trust Advanced AI Assistants? Justified Trust As a Function of Competence and AlignmentProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658964(1174-1186)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3630106.3658964
Kleanthous S(2024)Human-AI Teaming: Following the IMOI FrameworkArtificial Intelligence in HCI10.1007/978-3-031-60611-3_27(387-406)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-60611-3_27
Soroko DSavino GGray NSchöning J(2023)Social Transparency in Network Monitoring and Security SystemsProceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia10.1145/3626705.3627773(37-53)Online publication date: 3-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3626705.3627773
Mehrotra SJorge CJonker CTielman M(2023)Integrity-based Explanations for Fostering Appropriate Trust in AI AgentsACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems10.1145/361057814:1(1-36)Online publication date: 24-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610578
Ladhar RSharma STangirala SGupta NAzeem AJain AKatakam BBommakanti ASankaraiah CPiridi HYadav KVittalrao KRahman MChutani RShah RKatepallewar RChakraborty DSeth A(2023)AI-based Market Intelligence Systems for Farmer Collectives: A Case Study from IndiaACM Journal on Computing and Sustainable Societies10.1145/36092621:1(1-32)Online publication date: 22-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3609262
Tang GPan JWang HBasilico J(2023)Reward innovation for long-term member satisfactionProceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems10.1145/3604915.3608873(396-399)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3604915.3608873
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents