Researcher profile

Araz Taeihagh

Araz Taeihagh contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
8topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

The Risks of Machine Learning Systems

The speed and scale at which machine learning (ML) systems are deployed are accelerating even as an increasing number of studies highlight their potential for negative impact. There is a clear need for companies and regulators to manage the risk from proposed ML systems before they harm people. To achieve this, private and public sector actors first need to identify the risks posed by a proposed ML system. A system's overall risk is influenced by its direct and indirect effects. However, existing frameworks for ML risk/impact assessment often address an abstract notion of risk or do not concretize this dependence. We propose to address this gap with a context-sensitive framework for identifying ML system risks comprising two components: a taxonomy of the first- and second-order risks posed by ML systems, and their contributing factors. First-order risks stem from aspects of the ML system, while second-order risks stem from the consequences of first-order risks. These consequences are system failures that result from design and development choices. We explore how different risks may manifest in various types of ML systems, the factors that affect each risk, and how first-order risks may lead to second-order effects when the system interacts with the real world. Throughout the paper, we show how real events and prior research fit into our Machine Learning System Risk framework (MLSR). MLSR operates on ML systems rather than technologies or domains, recognizing that a system's design, implementation, and use case all contribute to its risk. In doing so, it unifies the risks that are commonly discussed in the ethical AI community (e.g., ethical/human rights risks) with system-level risks (e.g., application, design, control risks), paving the way for holistic risk assessments of ML systems.

preprint2020arXiv

Regulating human control over autonomous systems

In recent years, many sectors have experienced significant progress in automation, associated with the growing advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning. There are already automated robotic weapons, which are able to evaluate and engage with targets on their own, and there are already autonomous vehicles that do not need a human driver. It is argued that the use of increasingly autonomous systems (AS) should be guided by the policy of human control, according to which humans should execute a certain significant level of judgment over AS. While in the military sector there is a fear that AS could mean that humans lose control over life and death decisions, in the transportation domain, on the contrary, there is a strongly held view that autonomy could bring significant operational benefits by removing the need for a human driver. This article explores the notion of human control in the United States in the two domains of defense and transportation. The operationalization of emerging policies of human control results in the typology of direct and indirect human controls exercised over the use of AS. The typology helps to steer the debate away from the linguistic complexities of the term autonomy. It identifies instead where human factors are undergoing important changes and ultimately informs about more detailed rules and standards formulation, which differ across domains, applications, and sectors.

preprint2020arXiv

Smart City Governance in Developing Countries: A Systematic Literature Review

Smart cities that make broad use of digital technologies have been touted as possible solutions for the population pressures faced by many cities in developing countries and may help meet the rising demand for services and infrastructure. Nevertheless, the high financial cost involved in infrastructure maintenance, the substantial size of the informal economies, and various governance challenges are curtailing government idealism regarding smart cities. This review examines the state of smart city development in developing countries, which includes understanding the conceptualisations, motivations, and unique drivers behind (and barriers to) smarty city development. A total of 56 studies were identified from a systematic literature review from an initial pool of 3928 social sciences literature identified from two academic databases. Data were analysed using thematic synthesis and thematic analysis. The review found that technology-enabled smart cities in developing countries can only be realised when concurrent socioeconomic, human, legal, and regulatory reforms are instituted. Governments need to step up their efforts to fulfil the basic infrastructure needs of citizens, raise more revenue, construct clear regulatory frameworks to mitigate the technological risks involved, develop human capital, ensure digital inclusivity, and promote environmental sustainability. A supportive ecosystem that encourages citizen participation, nurtures start-ups, and promotes public-private partnerships needs to be created to realise their smart city vision.