Energy Efficiency Considerations for Popular AI BenchmarksRaphael Fischer, Matthias Jakobs, Katharina Morik
Advances in artificial intelligence need to become more resource-aware and sustainable. This requires clear assessment and reporting of energy efficiency trade-offs, like sacrificing fast running time for higher predictive performance. While first methods for investigating efficiency have been proposed, we still lack comprehensive results for popular methods and data sets. In this work, we attempt to fill this information gap by providing empiric insights for popular AI benchmarks, with a total of 100 experiments. Our findings are evidence of how different data sets all have their own efficiency landscape, and show that methods can be more or less likely to act efficiently.
Bridging the Communication Gap: Evaluating AI Labeling Practices for Trustworthy AI DevelopmentRaphael Fischer, Magdalena Wischnewski, Alexander van der Staay et al.
As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes integral to economy and society, communication gaps between developers, users, and stakeholders hinder trust and informed decision-making. High-level AI labels, inspired by frameworks like EU energy labels, have been proposed to make the properties of AI models more transparent. Without requiring deep technical expertise, they can inform on the trade-off between predictive performance and resource efficiency. However, the practical benefits and limitations of AI labeling remain underexplored. This study evaluates AI labeling through qualitative interviews along four key research questions. Based on thematic analysis and inductive coding, we found a broad range of practitioners to be interested in AI labeling (RQ1). They see benefits for alleviating communication gaps and aiding non-expert decision-makers, however limitations, misunderstandings, and suggestions for improvement were also discussed (RQ2). Compared to other reporting formats, interviewees positively evaluated the reduced complexity of labels, increasing overall comprehensibility (RQ3). Trust was influenced most by usability and the credibility of the responsible labeling authority, with mixed preferences for self-certification versus third-party certification (RQ4). Our Insights highlight that AI labels pose a trade-off between simplicity and complexity, which could be resolved by developing customizable and interactive labeling frameworks to address diverse user needs. Transparent labeling of resource efficiency also nudged interviewee priorities towards paying more attention to sustainability aspects during AI development. This study validates AI labels as a valuable tool for enhancing trust and communication in AI, offering actionable guidelines for their refinement and standardization.
7.5LGMay 21, 2021
Yes We Care! -- Certification for Machine Learning Methods through the Care Label FrameworkKatharina Morik, Helena Kotthaus, Raphael Fischer et al.
Machine learning applications have become ubiquitous. Their applications range from embedded control in production machines over process optimization in diverse areas (e.g., traffic, finance, sciences) to direct user interactions like advertising and recommendations. This has led to an increased effort of making machine learning trustworthy. Explainable and fair AI have already matured. They address the knowledgeable user and the application engineer. However, there are users that want to deploy a learned model in a similar way as their washing machine. These stakeholders do not want to spend time in understanding the model, but want to rely on guaranteed properties. What are the relevant properties? How can they be expressed to the stakeholder without presupposing machine learning knowledge? How can they be guaranteed for a certain implementation of a machine learning model? These questions move far beyond the current state of the art and we want to address them here. We propose a unified framework that certifies learning methods via care labels. They are easy to understand and draw inspiration from well-known certificates like textile labels or property cards of electronic devices. Our framework considers both, the machine learning theory and a given implementation. We test the implementation's compliance with theoretical properties and bounds.