European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" · HackerPapers discussions

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by denzil_correa

Wed, 17 Oct 2018 08:17:53 GMT

Along with the GDPR, the EU also bought "Right to Explanation" for algorithmic decision making. Basically, a user has the right to ask for an explanation on an algorithmic decision. This regulation has been mostly buried in the deluge of GDPR content but it's an important shift in decision making. There's a nice paper which outlines the implications and HN too had a discussion on it couple of years ago [0, 1]. [0] https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.08813 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12048223

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by dspoka

Thu, 25 Jan 2018 05:33:05 GMT

Europe has also passed “right to explanation” to help with this issue which is great. unfortunately it seems they came up with it in isolation from researchers on this topic and went with the don't record it philosophy. here is a good resource on that: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08813.pdf European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a “right to explanation”

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by blueblob

Mon, 05 Jun 2017 16:54:25 GMT

This is an area that fades in and out of focus with such venues as the Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning (WHI) [1]. It's becoming increasingly important when it comes to auditability and understanding of what is actually learned by algorithm. Avoiding classifiers from learning to discriminate based on age, race, etc [2] or in domains where it's important to know what the algorithm is doing such as medicine. Work in understanding DL is not really interpretable in any domain, typically they train another (simpler, less accurate) model and use that to explain what the model…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by agentcoops

Wed, 07 Sep 2016 23:27:14 GMT

Lives of members of social groups can be different for historical reasons. Because of this, the best selection of features (as in, how we select and encode relevant aspects of a dataset for a particular problem) that one would need to use, as well as the correlations between them, may be different between different groups. The question is not whether there is fundamentally a difference between, in this case, racial groups vis-a-vis paying back loans (i.e. that the only feature required in your model would be "is member of this group"), but what are the traits of possibilities of life that…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by tlb

Wed, 07 Sep 2016 19:36:08 GMT

Another recent paper on this topic: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08813v3.pdf. It shows how naive lending algorithms can skew against minority groups simply because there is less data available about them, even if their expected repayment rate is the same. It can be self-reinforcing. Imagine some new demographic group of customers appears, and without any data you make some loans to them. The actual repayment rate will be low, not because that group has a worse distribution than other groups, but simply because you couldn't identify the lowest-risk members. A simplistic ML model would conclude…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by wiwofone

Mon, 01 Aug 2016 21:15:31 GMT

Here is a paper [1] discussing the effects of the new European Union legislation mentioned in the article ("right to explanation"). Interesting related read, regardless of the validity of the numbers mentioned in this opinion piece. [1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08813v2.pdf

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by Smerity

Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:14:56 GMT

The European Union are likely to accelerate much of this type of research. They recently introduced regulations specifically targeting algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" for automated decisions. There's a Wired article[1] on the general scene and a paper that investigates the impact it may have on the industry[2]. Regarding differential discrimination, check out these two papers[3][4] - they're very similar to your idea :) [1]: http://www.wired.com/2016/07/artificial-intelligence-setting... [2]: http://arxiv.org/abs/1606.08813v2 [3]: http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.05897 [4]…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — mentioned by Isamu

Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:36:24 GMT

From the linked paper (http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08813v1.pdf) EU regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a “right to explanation” Bryce Goodman, Seth Flaxman We summarize the potential impact that the European Union’s new General Data Protection Regulation will have on the routine use of machine learning algorithms. Slated to take effect as law across the EU in 2018, it will restrict automated individual decision-making (that is, algorithms that make decisions based on user-level predictors) which “significantly affect” users. The law will also create a “right to explanation,” whereby…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

European Union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a "right to explanation" — HN submission

Thu, 07 Jul 2016 08:52:27 GMT