Kerstin Waxnegger

Dominik Kowald, Sebastian Scher, Viktoria Pammer-Schindler et al.

Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies (re-)shape modern life, driving innovation in a wide range of sectors. However, some AI systems have yielded unexpected or undesirable outcomes or have been used in questionable manners. As a result, there has been a surge in public and academic discussions about aspects that AI systems must fulfill to be considered trustworthy. In this paper, we synthesize existing conceptualizations of trustworthy AI along six requirements: 1) human agency and oversight, 2) fairness and non-discrimination, 3) transparency and explainability, 4) robustness and accuracy, 5) privacy and security, and 6) accountability. For each one, we provide a definition, describe how it can be established and evaluated, and discuss requirement-specific research challenges. Finally, we conclude this analysis by identifying overarching research challenges across the requirements with respect to 1) interdisciplinary research, 2) conceptual clarity, 3) context-dependency, 4) dynamics in evolving systems, and 5) investigations in real-world contexts. Thus, this paper synthesizes and consolidates a wide-ranging and active discussion currently taking place in various academic sub-communities and public forums. It aims to serve as a reference for a broad audience and as a basis for future research directions.

Gregor Autischer, Kerstin Waxnegger, Dominik Kowald

In this work-in-progress, we investigate the certification of AI systems, focusing on the practical application and limitations of existing certification catalogues in the light of the AI Act by attempting to certify a publicly available AI system. We aim to evaluate how well current approaches work to effectively certify an AI system, and how publicly accessible AI systems, that might not be actively maintained or initially intended for certification, can be selected and used for a sample certification process. Our methodology involves leveraging the Fraunhofer AI Assessment Catalogue as a comprehensive tool to systematically assess an AI model's compliance with certification standards. We find that while the catalogue effectively structures the evaluation process, it can also be cumbersome and time-consuming to use. We observe the limitations of an AI system that has no active development team anymore and highlighted the importance of complete system documentation. Finally, we identify some limitations of the certification catalogues used and proposed ideas on how to streamline the certification process.