Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning are changing our world through their impact on sectors including health care, education, employment, finance, and law. AI systems are developed using data that reflect the implicit and explicit biases of society, and there are significant concerns about how the predictive models in AI systems amplify inequity, privilege, and power in society. The widespread applications of AI have led to mainstream discourse about how AI systems are perpetuating racism, sexism, and classism; yet, concerns about ageism have been largely absent in the AI bias literature. Given the globally aging population and proliferation of AI, there is a need to critically examine the presence of age-related bias in AI systems. This forum article discusses ageism in AI systems and introduces a conceptual model that outlines intersecting pathways of technology development that can produce and reinforce digital ageism in AI systems. We also describe the broader ethical and legal implications and considerations for future directions in digital ageism research to advance knowledge in the field and deepen our understanding of how ageism in AI is fostered by broader cycles of injustice.

Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) is an emerging, multidisciplinary field of research that seeks to develop methods and tools for making AI systems more explainable or interpretable. XAI researchers increasingly recognise explainability as a context-, audience- and purpose-sensitive phenomenon, rather than a single well-defined property that can be directly measured and optimised. However, since there is currently no overarching definition of explainability, this poses a risk of miscommunication between the many different researchers within this multidisciplinary space. This is the problem we seek to address in this paper. We outline a framework, called Explanatory Pragmatism, which we argue has two attractive features. First, it allows us to conceptualise explainability in explicitly context-, audience- and purpose-relative terms, while retaining a unified underlying definition of explainability. Second, it makes visible any normative disagreements that may underpin conflicting claims about explainability regarding the purposes for which explanations are sought. Third, it allows us to distinguish several dimensions of AI explainability. We illustrate this framework by applying it to a case study involving a machine learning model for predicting whether patients suffering disorders of consciousness were likely to recover consciousness.

This paper surveys reasons for and against pursuing the field of machine ethics, understood as research aiming to build “ethical machines.” We clarify the nature of this goal, why it is worth pursuing, and the risks involved in its pursuit. First, we survey and clarify some of the philosophical issues surrounding the concept of an “ethical machine” and the aims of machine ethics. Second, we argue that while there are good prima facie reasons for pursuing machine ethics, including the potential to improve the ethical alignment of both humans and machines, there are also potential risks that must be considered. Third, we survey these potential risks and point to where research should be devoted to clarifying and managing potential risks. We conclude by making some recommendations about the questions that future work could address.

This article highlights a use of analogies in science that so far has received relatively little systematic discussion: providing reasons for pursuing a model or theory. Using the developme...

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a major driver of technological development in the 21st century, yet little attention has been paid to algorithmic biases toward older adults. Objective: This paper documents the search strategy and process for a scoping review exploring how age-related bias is encoded or amplified in AI systems as well as the corresponding legal and ethical implications. Methods: The scoping review follows a 6-stage methodology framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley. The search strategy has been established in 6 databases. We will investigate the legal implications of ageism in AI by searching grey literature databases, targeted websites, and popular search engines and using an iterative search strategy. Studies meet the inclusion criteria if they are in English, peer-reviewed, available electronically in full text, and meet one of the following two additional criteria: (1) include “bias” related to AI in any application (eg, facial recognition) and (2) discuss bias related to the concept of old age or ageism. At least two reviewers will independently conduct the title, abstract, and full-text screening. Search results will be reported using the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) reporting guideline. We will chart data on a structured form and conduct a thematic analysis to highlight the societal, legal, and ethical implications reported in the literature. Results: The database searches resulted in 7595 records when the searches were piloted in November 2021. The scoping review will be completed by December 2022. Conclusions: The findings will provide interdisciplinary insights into the extent of age-related bias in AI systems. The results will contribute foundational knowledge that can encourage multisectoral cooperation to ensure that AI is developed and deployed in a manner consistent with ethical values and human rights legislation as it relates to an older and aging population. We will publish the review findings in peer-reviewed journals and disseminate the key results with stakeholders via workshops and webinars. Trial Registration: OSF Registries AMG5P; https://osf.io/amg5p International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33211

Background: Research suggests that digital ageism, that is, age-related bias, is present in the development and deployment of machine learning (ML) models. Despite the recognition of the importance of this problem, there is a lack of research that specifically examines the strategies used to mitigate age-related bias in ML models and the effectiveness of these strategies.Objective: To address this gap, we conducted a scoping review of mitigation strategies to reduce age-related bias in ML.Methods: We followed a scoping review methodology framework developed by Arksey and O’Malley. The search was developed in conjunction with an information specialist and conducted in 6 electronic databases (IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, EMBASE, and the ACM digital library), as well as 2 additional gray literature databases (OpenGrey and Grey Literature Report).Results: We identified 8 publications that attempted to mitigate age-related bias in ML approaches. Age-related bias was introduced primarily due to a lack of representation of older adults in the data. Efforts to mitigate bias were categorized into one of three approaches: (1) creating a more balanced data set, (2) augmenting and supplementing their data, and (3) modifying the algorithm directly to achieve a more balanced result.Conclusions: Identifying and mitigating related biases in ML models is critical to fostering fairness, equity, inclusion, and social benefits. Our analysis underscores the ongoing need for rigorous research and the development of effective mitigation approaches to address digital ageism, ensuring that ML systems are used in a way that upholds the interests of all individuals.Trial Registration: Open Science Framework AMG5P; https://osf.io/amg5p