🎲 Harmful content analysis
AI data and trends for business leaders | AI systems series
Hello,
Small reminder: this is the third post of a new series in the data and trends section.
The new series presents another angle, slightly different from the previous series that seeded the TOP framework1 and serves as the building block of our vision of AI safety implementation.
In this new series, we focus on more advanced topics in subsequent weeks, where we'll delve deeper into specific measurement methodologies and implementation strategies.
I believe this series will contribute significantly to the ongoing development of robust AI safety practices.—Yael.
Previous post:
Defining and categorizing harmful content
Harmful content poses a significant challenge in the age of increasingly sophisticated AI models.
Addressing this issue effectively requires a multifaceted approach, including clear definitions, robust classification systems, accurate measurement methodologies, insightful statistical analysis, and practical detection pipelines.
Harmful content encompasses a broad spectrum of material that can cause or contribute to individual or societal harm.
This includes but isn't limited to:
Hate speech: Attacks or demeans a group based on protected attributes like race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. (Davidson et al., 2017)
Cyberbullying: Harassment or intimidation through electronic means. (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010)
Misinformation/Disinformation: False or inaccurate information, often spread with malicious intent. (Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017)
Violent extremism: Content promoting or inciting violence for ideological purposes. (Berger & Morgan, 2015)
Self-harm promotion: Content encouraging or glorifying self-harm or suicide. (Robinson et al., 2016)
Child sexual abuse material (CSAM): Sexually explicit content involving minors.
Personally Identifiable Information (PII): Sensitive data like addresses, phone numbers, and financial details.
Categorization can be further refined by considering the target (individual, group, society), the type of harm (emotional, physical, reputational), and the intent (malicious, negligent, accidental).
Given the potential for AI systems to generate or spread harmful content, business leaders must prioritize safety and responsibility. To that end, I pose two critical questions:
What specific measures are you implementing to mitigate the risk of your AI systems generating or amplifying harmful content, and how are you ensuring these measures are consistently applied across all applications and platforms?
How are you incorporating ethical considerations and societal impact assessments into your AI development and deployment processes, particularly concerning the potential for unintended biases or discriminatory outcomes?