Applicable legal frameworks
Québec
Article 12.1 (explication d'une décision automatisée)
Quebec law on the protection of personal information in force since September 22, 2023, regulating the collection, use, disclosure, and retention of personal information by businesses and public bodies. Includes obligations regarding automated decision-making (Article 12.1).
Exigence d'explicabilité
AMF guideline and expectations regarding the use of AI by financial institutions and insurers in Quebec, focusing on governance, risk management, fairness, and transparency.
Canada
Obligations de transparence
Federal bill (C-27) introducing a regulatory framework for high-impact AI systems. Creates an AI and Data Commissioner and imposes assessment, mitigation, and transparency obligations.
UE
Articles 13, 50
European regulation establishing a harmonized framework for AI, based on a risk-based approach (unacceptable, high, limited, minimal risk). Relevant for Quebec organizations doing business in the EU.
Quebec sector examples
Services publics
Un organisme public refuse une prestation à un citoyen sans pouvoir expliquer la décision automatisée, en contradiction avec l'article 12.1 de la Loi 25.
Banque et assurance
Une assureure ne peut justifier auprès de l'AMF la logique d'un modèle de tarification jugée discriminatoire en raison de son opacité.
Recommended mitigations
- 2.2Model Alignment
Technical methods to ensure that AI systems understand and adhere to human values and intentions.
- 4.1System Documentation
Comprehensive documentation protocols that record technical specifications, intended uses, capabilities, and limitations of AI systems to enable informed assessment and governance.
- 4.2Risk Disclosure
Formal reporting protocols and notification systems that communicate information on risks, mitigation plans, safety assessments, and significant AI-related activities to enable external oversight and inform stakeholders.
- 4.4Governance Disclosure
Formal disclosure mechanisms that communicate governance structures, decision-making frameworks, and safety commitments to increase transparency and enable external oversight of high-stakes AI decisions.
- 4.5Third-Party System Access
Mechanisms granting controlled system access to verified external parties to enable independent assessment, validation, and safety research on AI models and capabilities.
Documented risks (42)
Entries from the AI Risk Repository (MIT) classified under this subdomain. Original content in English.
42 entries
05.13.00Transparency - Explainability
Being a multifaceted concept, the term 'transparency' is both used to refer to technical explainability as well as organizational openness. Regarding the former, papers underscore the need for mechanistic interpretability and for explaining internal mechanisms in generative models. On the organizational front, transparency relates to practices such as informing users about capabilities and shortcomings of models, as well as adhering to documentation and reporting requirements for data collection processes or risk evaluations.
06.06.00Lack of transparency
"The idea of a "black box" making decisions without any explanation, without offering insight in the process, has a couple of disadvantages: it may fail to gain the trust of its users and it may fail to meet regulatory standards such as the ability to audit."
09.02.03Decision making transparency
"We face significant challenges bringing transparency to artificial network decisionmaking processes. Will we have transparency in AI decision making?"
10.05.00Lack of transparency
"In situations in which the development and use of AI are not explained to the user, or in which the decision processes do not provide the criteria or steps that constitute the decision, the use of AI becomes inexplicable."
12.04.00Explainability & Transparency
"The feasibility of understanding and interpreting an AI system's decisions and actions, and the openness of the developer about the data used, algorithms employed, and decisions made. Lack of these elements can create risks of misuse, misinterpretation, and lack of accountability."
14.05.00Degree of Transparency and Explainability
"Transparency is the characteristic of a system that describes the degree to which appropriate information about the system is communicated to relevant stakeholders, whereas explainability describes the property of an AI system to express important factors influencing the results of the AI system in a way that is understandable for humans....Information about the model underlying the decision-making process is relevant for transparency. Systems with a low degree of transparency can pose risks in terms of their fairness, security and accountability. "
30.05.00Explainability & Reasoning
The ability to explain the outputs to users and reason correctly
30.05.01Lack of Interpretability
Due to the black box nature of most machine learning models, users typically are not able to understand the reasoning behind the model decisions
33.02.03Explainability
"A recurrent concern about AI algorithms is the lack of explainability for the model, which means information about how the algorithm arrives at its results is deficient (Deeks, 2019). Specifically, for generative AI models, there is no transparency to the reasoning of how the model arrives at the results (Dwivedi et al., 2023). The lack of transparency raises several issues. First, it might be difficult for users to interpret and understand the output (Dwivedi et al., 2023). It would also be difficult for users to discover potential mistakes in the output (Rudin, 2019). Further, when the interpretation and evaluation of the output are inaccessible, users may have problems trusting the system and their responses or recommendations (Burrell, 2016). Additionally, from the perspective of law and regulations, it would be hard for the regulatory body to judge whether the generative AI system is potentially unfair or biased (Rieder & Simon, 2017)."
33.02.05Prompt engineering
"With the wide application of generative AI, the ability to interact with AI efficiently and effectively has become one of the most important media literacies. Hence, it is imperative for generative AI users to learn and apply the principles of prompt engineering, which refers to a systematic process of carefully designing prompts or inputs to generative AI models to elicit valuable outputs. Due to the ambiguity of human languages, the interaction between humans and machines through prompts may lead to errors or misunderstandings. Hence, the quality of prompts is important. Another challenge is to debug the prompts and improve the ability to communicate with generative AI (V. Liu & Chilton, 2022)."
37.02.04Attributing the responsibility for AI's failures
"This section, constituting almost 8% of the articles, addresses the implications arising from AI acting and learning without direct human supervision, encompassing two main issues: a responsibility gap and AI's moral status."
38.03.00Transparency and explainability
"A recurring complaint among participants was a lack of knowledge about how AI systems made judgements. They emphasized the significance of making AI systems more visible and explainable so that people may have confidence in their outputs and hold them accountable for their activities. Because AI systems are typically opaque, making it difficult for users to understand the rationale behind their judgements, ethical concerns about AI, as well as issues of transparency and explainability, arise. This lack of understanding can generate suspicion and reluctance to adopt AI technology, as well as making it harder to hold AI systems accountable for their actions."
38.05.00Trust and reliability
"The participants of the study emphasized the importance of trustworthiness and reliability in AI systems. The authors emphasized the importance of preserving precision and objectivity in the outcomes produced by AI systems, while also ensuring transparency in their decision-making procedures. The significance of reliability and credibility in AI systems is escalating in tandem with the proliferation of these technologies across diverse domains of society. This underscores the importance of ensuring user confidence. The concern regarding the dependability of AI systems and their inherent biases is a common issue among research participants, emphasizing the necessity for stringent validation procedures and transparency. Establishing and implementing dependable standards, ensuring impartial algorithms and upholding transparency in the decision-making process are critical measures for addressing ethical considerations and fostering confidence in AI systems. The advancement and implementation of AI technology in an ethical manner is contingent upon the successful resolution of trust and reliability concerns. These issues are of paramount importance in ensuring the protection of user welfare and the promotion of societal advantages. The utilization of artificial intelligence was found to be a subject of significant concern for the majority of interviewees, particularly with regards to trust and reliability (Table 1, Figure 1). The establishment of trust in AI systems was highlighted as a crucial factor for facilitating their widespread adoption by two of the participants, specifically Participant 4 and 7. The authors reiterated the importance of prioritising the advancement of reliable and unbiased algorithms"
39.19.00Accountability
An essential feature of decision-making in humans, AI, and also HLI-based agents is accountability. Implementing this feature in machines is a difficult task because many challenges should be considered to organize an AI-based model that is accountable. It should be noted that this issue in human decision-making is not ideal, and many factors such as bias, diversity, fairness, paradox, and ambiguity may affect it. In addition, the human decision-making process is based on personal flexibility, context-sensitive paradigms, empathy, and complex moral judgments. Therefore, all of these challenges are inherent to designing algorithms for AI and also HLI models that consider accountability.
39.20.00Transparency
an external entity of an AI-based ecosystem may want to know which parts of data affect the final decision in a learning model
39.21.00Reproducibility
How a learning model can be reproduced when it is obtained based on various sets of data and a large space of parameters. This problem becomes more challenging in data-driven learning procedures without transparent instructions
39.25.00Verifiability
In many applications of AI-based systems such as medical healthcare and military services, the lack of verification of code may not be tolerable... due to some characteristics such as the non-linear and complex structure of AI-based solutions, existing solutions have been generally considered “black boxes”, not providing any information about what exactly makes them appear in their predictions and decision-making processes.
42.01.00Accountability
"The ability to determine whether a decision was made in accordance with procedural and substantive standards and to hold someone responsible if those standards are not met."
42.06.00Opacity
"Stems from the mismatch between mathematical optimization in high-dimensionality characteristic of machine learning and the demands of human-scale reasoning and styles of semantic interpretation."
42.21.00Explainability
"Any action or procedure performed by a model with the intention of clarifying or detailing its internal functions."
Evaluate this risk for your use case
Our risk evaluation wizard is coming soon.