Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) hold the promise of improving government. Given the advanced capabilities of AI applications, it is critical that these are embedded using standard operational procedures, clear epistemic criteria, and behave in alignment with the normative expectations of society. Scholars in multiple domains have subsequently begun to conceptualize the different forms that AI systems may take, highlighting both their potential benefits and pitfalls. However, the literature remains fragmented, with researchers in social science disciplines like public administration and political science, and the fast-moving fields of AI, ML, and robotics, all developing concepts in relative isolation. Although there are calls to formalize the emerging study of AI in government, a balanced account that captures the full breadth of theoretical perspectives needed to understand the consequences of embedding AI into a public sector context is lacking. Here, we unify efforts across social and technical disciplines by using concept mapping to identify 107 different terms used in the multidisciplinary study of AI. We inductively sort these into three distinct semantic groups, which we label the (a) operational, (b) epistemic, and (c) normative domains. We then build on the results of this mapping exercise by proposing three new multifaceted concepts to study AI-based systems for government (AI-GOV) in an integrated, forward-looking way, which we call (1) operational fitness, (2) epistemic completeness, and (3) normative salience. Finally, we put these concepts to work by using them as dimensions in a conceptual typology of AI-GOV and connecting each with emerging AI technical measurement standards to encourage operationalization, foster cross-disciplinary dialogue, and stimulate debate among those aiming to reshape public administration with AI.
翻译:人工智能(AI)和机器学习(ML)方面的最新进展是改善政府的前景的希望。鉴于人工智能应用的先进能力,至关重要的是这些应用必须采用标准操作程序、明确的缩略语标准以及符合社会规范性期望的方式嵌入。多个领域的学者随后开始构思人工智能系统可能采取的不同形式,强调其潜在好处和缺陷。然而,文献仍然支离破碎,诸如公共行政和政治科学等社会科学学科的研究人员以及人工智能、ML和机器人的快速移动领域,所有这些领域都在相对孤立地形成概念。尽管有人呼吁将正在形成的对人工智能的研究正规化,但有一个平衡的账户,能够捕捉到将人工智能嵌入公共部门环境的后果所需要的理论观点的全方位。在这里,我们通过概念绘图,找出在人工智能的多学科研究中使用的107个不同术语。我们将这些术语归纳成三个不同的规范性概念组,我们将其标为(a) 操作性、(b) 缩略语、和(c) 将每个正在形成的对人工智能进行的研究,然后我们用一个具有前瞻性的透明性概念,我们用新的结构来推进这些系统的结果。