CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 8Ethics and Social Impacts of AIExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Digitalization, Law, and Regulation

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Responsible Artificial Intelligence: A Structured Literature Review

Open access
Goellner, Sabrina, Tropmann-Frick, Marina, Brumen, Bostjan·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2403.06910arXiv 2403.06910
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Our research endeavors to advance the concept of responsible artificial intelligence (AI), a topic of increasing importance within EU policy discussions. The EU has recently issued several publications emphasizing the necessity of trust in AI, underscoring the dual nature of AI as both a beneficial tool and a potential weapon. This dichotomy highlights the urgent need for international regulation. Concurrently, there is a need for frameworks that guide companies in AI development, ensuring compliance with such regulations. Our research aims to assist lawmakers and machine learning practitioners in navigating the evolving landscape of AI regulation, identifying focal areas for future attention. This paper introduces a comprehensive and, to our knowledge, the first unified definition of responsible AI. Through a structured literature review, we elucidate the current understanding of responsible AI. Drawing from this analysis, we propose an approach for developing a future framework centered around this concept. Our findings advocate for a human-centric approach to Responsible AI. This approach encompasses the implementation of AI methods with a strong emphasis on ethics, model explainability, and the pillars of privacy, security, and trust.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2403.06910

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 240

  1. Kitchenham B, Brereton OP, Budgen D, Turne M, Bailey J, Linkman S. Systematic literature re- views in software engineering -A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology. 2009;51:7-15.
  2. Maree C, Modal JE, Omlin CW. Towards Responsible AI for Financial Transactions. In: 2020 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI); 2020. p. 16-21.
  3. Alejandro Barredo Arrieta, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, Javier Del Ser, Adrien Bennetot, Siham Tabik, Alberto Barbado, et al. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion. 2020;58:82-115. Available from: https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1566253519308103.
  4. Eitel-Porter R. Beyond the promise: implementing ethical AI. AI and Ethics. 2021;1(1):73-80.
  5. Werder K, Ramesh B, Zhang RS. Establishing Data Provenance for Responsible Artificial Intelligence Systems. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems. 2022 Jun;13(2):1-23. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3503488. · DOI
  6. Jakesch M, Buc ¸inca Z, Amershi S, Olteanu A. How Different Groups Prioritize Ethical Values for Responsible AI. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 310-23. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/ 3531146.3533097. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Jain S, Luthra M, Sharma S, Fatima M. Trustworthiness of Artificial Intelligence. In: 2020 6th In- ternational Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS); 2020. p. 907-12.
  8. Sheth A, Gaur M, Roy K, Faldu K. Knowledge-Intensive Language Understanding for Explainable AI. IEEE Internet Computing. 2021;25(5):19-24.
  9. Wing JM. Trustworthy AI. Commun ACM. 2021;64(10):64-71.
  10. Zhang T, Qin Y, Li Q. Trusted Artificial Intelligence: Technique Requirements and Best Practices. In: 2021 International Conference on Cyberworlds (CW); 2021. p. 303-6. ISSN: 2642-3596.
  11. Li B, Qi P, Liu B, Di S, Liu J, Pei J, et al. Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practices. ACM Computing Surveys. 2022 Aug:3555803. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/ 3555803. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Strobel M, Shokri R. Data Privacy and Trustworthy Machine Learning. IEEE Security & Privacy. 2022 Sep;20(5):44-9. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9802763/.
  13. Kumar A, Braud T, Tarkoma S, Hui P. Trustworthy AI in the Age of Pervasive Computing and Big Data. In: 2020 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (PerCom Workshops); 2020. p. 1-6.
  14. Floridi L, Taddeo M. What is data ethics? Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society A Mathe- matical Physical and Engineering Sciences. 2016 12;374:20160360.
  15. Hickok M. Lessons learned from AI ethics principles for future actions. AI and Ethics. 2021;1(1):41-7.
  16. Loi M, Heitz C, Christen M. A Comparative Assessment and Synthesis of Twenty Ethics Codes on AI and Big Data. In: 2020 7th Swiss Conference on Data Science (SDS); 2020. p. 41-6.
  17. Milossi M, Alexandropoulou-Egyptiadou E, Psannis KE. AI Ethics: Algorithmic Determinism or Self- Determination? The GPDR Approach. IEEE Access. 2021;9:58455-66.
  18. Floridi L, Cowls J, Beltrametti M, Chatila R, Chazerand P, Dignum V, et al. AI4People-an ethical framework for a good AI society: opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines. 2018;28(4):689-707.
  19. Shneiderman B. Bridging the Gap Between Ethics and Practice: Guidelines for Reliable, Safe, and Trustworthy Human-Centered AI Systems. ACM Trans Interact Intell Syst. 2020;10(4).
  20. Middleton SE, Letouzé E, Hossaini A, Chapman A. Trust, regulation, and human-in-the-loop AI: within the European region. Communications of the ACM. 2022 Apr;65(4):64-8. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3511597. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Singh R, Vatsa M, Ratha N. Trustworthy AI. In: 8th ACM IKDD CODS and 26th COMAD. CODS COMAD 2021. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 449-53.
  22. Kaur D, Uslu S, Rittichier KJ, Durresi A. Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence: A Review. ACM Comput- ing Surveys. 2023 Mar;55(2):1-38. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491209. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Araujo T, Helberger N, Kruikemeier S, de Vreese CH. In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence. AI & SOCIETY. 2020;35(3):611-23.
  24. Knowles B, Richards JT. The Sanction of Authority: Promoting Public Trust in AI. In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. FAccT '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 262-71.
  25. Lee MK, Rich K. Who Is Included in Human Perceptions of AI?: Trust and Perceived Fairness around Healthcare AI and Cultural Mistrust. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. .
  26. Toreini E, Aitken M, Coopamootoo K, Elliott K, Zelaya CG, van Moorsel A. The Relationship be- tween Trust in AI and Trustworthy Machine Learning Technologies. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Con- ference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. FAT* '20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020. p. 272-83.
  27. Wang J, Moulden A. AI Trust Score: A User-Centered Approach to Building, Designing, and Mea- suring the Success of Intelligent Workplace Features. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Con- ference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI EA '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. .
  28. Nazaretsky T, Cukurova M, Alexandron G. An Instrument for Measuring Teachers' Trust in AI-Based Educational Technology. In: LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Confer- ence. Online USA: ACM; 2022. p. 56-66. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/ 3506860.3506866. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Liao QV, Sundar SS. Designing for Responsible Trust in AI Systems: A Communication Perspec- tive. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 1257-68. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3531146. 3533182. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Seshia SA, Sadigh D, Sastry SS. Toward verified artificial intelligence. Communications of the ACM. 2022 Jul;65(7):46-55. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3503914. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Banerjee S, Alsop P, Jones L, Cardinal RN. Patient and public involvement to build trust in artificial intelligence: A framework, tools, and case studies. Patterns. 2022 Jun;3(6):100506. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2666389922000988.
  32. Thuraisingham B. Trustworthy Machine Learning. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 2022 Jan;37(1):21-4. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9756264/.
  33. Choung H, David P, Ross A. Trust and ethics in AI. AI & SOCIETY. 2022 May. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00146-022-01473-4. · DOI
  34. Jacovi A, Marasović A, Miller T, Goldberg Y. Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequi- sites, Causes and Goals of Human Trust in AI. In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fair- ness, Accountability, and Transparency. FAccT '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 624-35.
  35. Peng Hu, Yaobin Lu, Yeming (Yale) Gong. Dual humanness and trust in conversational AI: A person- centered approach. Computers in Human Behavior. 2021;119:106727. Available from: https:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563221000492.
  36. Holzinger A, Dehmer M, Emmert-Streib F, Cucchiara R, Augenstein I, Ser JD, et al. Informa- tion fusion as an integrative cross-cutting enabler to achieve robust, explainable, and trustworthy medical artificial intelligence. Information Fusion. 2022 Mar;79:263-78. Available from: https: //linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1566253521002050.
  37. Gittens A, Yener B, Yung M. An Adversarial Perspective on Accuracy, Robustness, Fairness, and Privacy: Multilateral-Tradeoffs in Trustworthy ML. IEEE Access. 2022:1-1. Available from: https: //ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9933776/.
  38. Allahabadi H, Amann J, Balot I, Beretta A, Binkley C, Bozenhard J, et al. Assessing Trustworthy AI in times of COVID-19. Deep Learning for predicting a multi-regional score conveying the degree of lung compromise in COVID-19 patients. IEEE. 2022:32.
  39. Utomo S, John A, Rouniyar A, Hsu HC, Hsiung PA. Federated Trustworthy AI Architecture for Smart Cities. In: 2022 IEEE International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2). Pafos, Cyprus: IEEE; 2022. p. 1-7. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9922069/.
  40. Burkart N, Huber MF. A Survey on the Explainability of Supervised Machine Learning. J Artif Int Res. 2021;70:245-317.
  41. Stahl BC, Rodrigues R, Santiago N, Macnish K. A European Agency for Artificial Intelligence: Pro- tecting fundamental rights and ethical values. Computer Law & Security Review. 2022 Jul;45:105661. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0267364922000097.
  42. Huang C, Zhang Z, Mao B, Yao X. An Overview of Artificial Intelligence Ethics. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence. 2022:1-21. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/ 9844014/.
  43. Petersen E, Potdevin Y, Mohammadi E, Zidowitz S, Breyer S, Nowotka D, et al. Responsible and Regu- latory Conform Machine Learning for Medicine: A Survey of Challenges and Solutions. IEEE Access. 2022;10:58375-418. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9783196/.
  44. Benefo EO, Tingler A, White M, Cover J, Torres L, Broussard C, et al. Ethical, legal, social, and economic (ELSE) implications of artificial intelligence at a global level: a scientometrics ap- proach. AI and Ethics. 2022 Jan. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-021-00124-6. · DOI
  45. Karimian G, Petelos E, Evers SMAA. The ethical issues of the application of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a systematic scoping review. AI and Ethics. 2022 Mar. Available from: https://link. springer.com/10.1007/s43681-021-00131-7. · DOI
  46. Attard-Frost B. The ethics of AI business practices: a review of 47 AI ethics guidelines. AI and Ethics. 2022:18.
  47. Tsamados A, Aggarwal N, Cowls J, Morley J, Roberts H, Taddeo M, et al. The ethics of algorithms: key problems and solutions. AI & SOCIETY. 2022 Mar;37(1):215-30. Available from: https:// link.springer.com/10.1007/s00146-021-01154-8. · DOI · Paper page
  48. Cheng L, Varshney KR, Liu H. Socially Responsible AI Algorithms: Issues, Purposes, and Challenges. J Artif Int Res. 2021;71:1137-81.
  49. Benjamins R. A choices framework for the responsible use of AI. AI and Ethics. 2021;1(1):49-53.
  50. Peters D, Vold K, Robinson D, Calvo RA. Responsible AI-Two Frameworks for Ethical Design Practice. IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society. 2020;1(1):34-47.
  51. Ville Vakkuri, Kai-Kristian Kemell, Marianna Jantunen, Erika Halme, Pekka Abrahamsson. EC- COLA -A method for implementing ethically aligned AI systems. Journal of Systems and Software. 2021;182:111067. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0164121221001643.
  52. Contractor D, McDuff D, Haines JK, Lee J, Hines C, Hecht B, et al. Behavioral Use Licensing for Responsible AI. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 778-88. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/ 3531146.3533143. · DOI · Paper page
  53. Joisten K, Thiemer N, Renner T, Janssen A, Scheffler A. Focusing on the Ethical Challenges of Data Breaches and Applications. In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Assured Autonomy (ICAA). Fajardo, PR, USA: IEEE; 2022. p. 74-82. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee. org/document/9763591/.
  54. Bruschi D, Diomede N. A framework for assessing AI ethics with applications to cybersecu- rity. AI and Ethics. 2022 May. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-022-00162-8. · DOI
  55. Vyhmeister E, Castane G, Östberg PO, Thevenin S. A responsible AI framework: pipeline contex- tualisation. AI and Ethics. 2022 Apr. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-022-00154-8. · DOI
  56. Belenguer L. AI bias: exploring discriminatory algorithmic decision-making models and the applica- tion of possible machine-centric solutions adapted from the pharmaceutical industry. AI and Ethics. 2022 Feb. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-022-00138-8. · DOI · Paper page
  57. Svetlova E. AI ethics and systemic risks in finance. AI and Ethics. 2022 Nov;2(4):713-25. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-021-00129-1. · DOI
  58. Li J, Chignell M. FMEA-AI: AI fairness impact assessment using failure mode and effects anal- ysis. AI and Ethics. 2022 Mar. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-022-00145-9. · DOI
  59. Georgieva I, Lazo C, Timan T, van Veenstra AF. From AI ethics principles to data science practice: a reflection and a gap analysis based on recent frameworks and practical experience. AI and Ethics. 2022 Jan. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-021-00127-3. · DOI · Paper page
  60. Kumar S, Choudhury S. Normative ethics, human rights, and artificial intelligence. AI and Ethics. 2022 May. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-022-00170-8. · DOI
  61. Solanki P, Grundy J, Hussain W. Operationalising ethics in artificial intelligence for healthcare: a framework for AI developers. AI and Ethics. 2022 Jul. Available from: https://link.springer. com/10.1007/s43681-022-00195-z. · DOI · Paper page
  62. Krijger J, Thuis T, de Ruiter M, Ligthart E, Broekman I. The AI ethics maturity model: a holistic approach to advancing ethical data science in organizations. AI and Ethics. 2022 Oct. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-022-00228-7. · DOI
  63. Wang A, Liu A, Zhang R, Kleiman A, Kim L, Zhao D, et al. REVISE: A Tool for Measuring and Mitigating Bias in Visual Datasets. International Journal of Computer Vision. 2022 Jul;130(7):1790- 810. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11263-022-01625-5. · DOI
  64. Xiaoling P. Discussion on Ethical Dilemma Caused by Artificial Intelligence and Countermeasures. In: 2021 IEEE Asia-Pacific Conference on Image Processing, Electronics and Computers (IPEC); 2021. p. 453-7.
  65. Sætra HS, Coeckelbergh M, Danaher J. The AI ethicist's dilemma: fighting Big Tech by sup- porting Big Tech. AI and Ethics. 2021 Dec. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/ s43681-021-00123-7. · DOI
  66. Cooper AF, Moss E, Laufer B, Nissenbaum H. Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relation- ality, Responsibility, and Robustness in Machine Learning. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 864-76. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3531146.3533150. · DOI
  67. Vakkuri V, Kemell KK, Tolvanen J, Jantunen M, Halme E, Abrahamsson P. How Do Software Com- panies Deal with Artificial Intelligence Ethics? A Gap Analysis. In: The International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering 2022. Gothenburg Sweden: ACM; 2022. p. 100-9. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3530019.3530030. · DOI
  68. Weinberg L. Rethinking Fairness: An Interdisciplinary Survey of Critiques of Hegemonic ML Fairness Approaches. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 2022 May;74:75-109. Available from: https: //jair.org/index.php/jair/article/view/13196.
  69. Lin H, Zhang Y, Chen X, Zhai R, Kuai Z. Artificial Intelligence Ethical in Environmental Protection. In: 2022 International Seminar on Computer Science and Engineering Technology (SCSET). Indianapolis, IN, USA: IEEE; 2022. p. 137-40. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/ 9700880/.
  70. Mulligan C, Elaluf-Calderwood S. AI ethics: A framework for measuring embodied carbon in AI systems. AI and Ethics. 2022 Aug;2(3):363-75. Available from: https://link.springer.com/ 10.1007/s43681-021-00071-2. · DOI
  71. Waller RR, Waller RL. Assembled Bias: Beyond Transparent Algorithmic Bias. Minds and Machines. 2022 Sep;32(3):533-62. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s11023-022-09605-x. · DOI
  72. Hagendorff T. Blind spots in AI ethics. AI and Ethics. 2022 Nov;2(4):851-67. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-021-00122-8. · DOI
  73. Bickley SJ, Torgler B. Cognitive architectures for artificial intelligence ethics. AI & SOCIETY. 2022 Jun. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00146-022-01452-9. · DOI
  74. Fernandez-Quilez A. Deep learning in radiology: ethics of data and on the value of algorithm transparency, interpretability and explainability. AI and Ethics. 2022 Apr. Available from: https: //link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-022-00161-9. · DOI · Paper page
  75. Munn L. The uselessness of AI ethics. AI and Ethics. 2022 Aug. Available from: https://link. springer.com/10.1007/s43681-022-00209-w. · DOI
  76. Hagendorff T. The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines. Minds and Machines. 2020;30(1):99-120.
  77. Zhou J, Chen F, Berry A, Reed M, Zhang S, Savage S. A Survey on Ethical Principles of AI and Implementations. In: 2020 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI); 2020. p. 3010-7.
  78. Zhang B, Anderljung M, Kahn L, Dreksler N, Horowitz MC, Dafoe A. Ethics and Governance of Artificial Intelligence: Evidence from a Survey of Machine Learning Researchers. J Artif Int Res. 2021;71:591-666.
  79. Tartaglione E, Grangetto M. A non-Discriminatory Approach to Ethical Deep Learning. In: 2020 IEEE 19th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom); 2020. p. 943-50.
  80. Forsyth S, Dalton B, Foster EH, Walsh B, Smilack J, Yeh T. Imagine a More Ethical AI: Using Stories to Develop Teens' Awareness and Understanding of Artificial Intelligence and its Societal Impacts. In: 2021 Conference on Research in Equitable and Sustained Participation in Engineering, Computing, and Technology (RESPECT); 2021. p. 1-2.
  81. Madaio M, Egede L, Subramonyam H, Wortman Vaughan J, Wallach H. Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Support. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction. 2022 Mar;6(CSCW1):1-26. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/ doi/10.1145/3512899. · DOI · Paper page
  82. Tolmeijer S, Christen M, Kandul S, Kneer M, Bernstein A. Capable but Amoral? Comparing AI and Human Expert Collaboration in Ethical Decision Making. In: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New Orleans LA USA: ACM; 2022. p. 1-17. Available from: https://dl.acm. org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517732. · DOI · Paper page
  83. Boyd K. Designing Up with Value-Sensitive Design: Building a Field Guide for Ethical ML Devel- opment. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 2069-82. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3531146. 3534626. · DOI
  84. Chien I, Deliu N, Turner R, Weller A, Villar S, Kilbertus N. Multi-disciplinary fairness considerations in machine learning for clinical trials. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 906-24. Available from: https://dl.acm. org/doi/10.1145/3531146.3533154. · DOI
  85. Lu Q, Zhu L, Xu X, Whittle J, Douglas D, Sanderson C. Software engineering for responsible AI: an empirical study and operationalised patterns. In: Proceedings of the 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice. Pittsburgh Pennsylvania: ACM; 2022. p. 241-2. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3510457.3513063. · DOI
  86. Nakao Y, Stumpf S, Ahmed S, Naseer A, Strappelli L. Toward Involving End-users in Interac- tive Human-in-the-loop AI Fairness. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems. 2022 Sep;12(3):1-30. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3514258. · DOI · Paper page
  87. Rubeis G. iHealth: The ethics of artificial intelligence and big data in mental healthcare. Internet Inter- ventions. 2022 Apr;28:100518. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/ pii/S2214782922000252.
  88. Fabris A, Messina S, Silvello G, Susto GA. Algorithmic fairness datasets: the story so far. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. 2022 Sep. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s10618-022-00854-z. · DOI
  89. Häußermann JJ, Lütge C. Community-in-the-loop: towards pluralistic value creation in AI, or-why AI needs business ethics. AI and Ethics. 2022 May;2(2):341-62. Available from: https://link. springer.com/10.1007/s43681-021-00047-2. · DOI
  90. Fung P, Etienne H. Confucius, cyberpunk and Mr. Science: comparing AI ethics principles between China and the EU. AI and Ethics. 2022 Jun. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10. 1007/s43681-022-00180-6. · DOI
  91. Starke G, Schmidt B, De Clercq E, Elger BS. Explainability as fig leaf? An exploration of experts' ethical expectations towards machine learning in psychiatry. AI and Ethics. 2022 Jun. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s43681-022-00177-1. · DOI
  92. Stahl BC. From computer ethics and the ethics of AI towards an ethics of digital ecosystems. AI and Ethics. 2022 Feb;2(1):65-77. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-021-00080-1. · DOI · Paper page
  93. Brusseau J. From the ground truth up: doing AI ethics from practice to principles. AI & SOCIETY. 2022 Jan. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00146-021-01336-4. · DOI
  94. Anderson MM, Fort K. From the ground up: developing a practical ethical methodology for integrating AI into industry. AI & SOCIETY. 2022 Jul. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10. 1007/s00146-022-01531-x. · DOI
  95. Hunkenschroer AL, Kriebitz A. Is AI recruiting (un)ethical? A human rights perspective on the use of AI for hiring. AI and Ethics. 2022 Jul. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-022-00166-4. · DOI · Paper page
  96. Valentine L, D'Alfonso S, Lederman R. Recommender systems for mental health apps: advantages and ethical challenges. AI & SOCIETY. 2022 Jan. Available from: https://link.springer.com/ 10.1007/s00146-021-01322-w. · DOI
  97. Jacobs M, Simon J. Reexamining computer ethics in light of AI systems and AI regula- tion. AI and Ethics. 2022 Oct. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-022-00229-6. · DOI
  98. Persson E, Hedlund M. The future of AI in our hands? To what extent are we as indi- viduals morally responsible for guiding the development of AI in a desirable direction? AI and Ethics. 2022 Nov;2(4):683-95. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-021-00125-5. · DOI
  99. Zhou J, Chen F, Holzinger A. Towards Explainability for AI Fairness. In: Holzinger A, Goebel R, Fong R, Moon T, Müller KR, Samek W, editors. xxAI -Beyond Explainable AI. vol. 13200. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2022. p. 375-86. Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-031-04083-2_18. · DOI
  100. Maclure J. AI, Explainability and Public Reason: The Argument from the Limitations of the Human Mind. Minds and Machines. 2021;31(3):421-38.
  101. Vellido A. The importance of interpretability and visualization in machine learning for applications in medicine and health care. Neural Computing and Applications. 2020;32(24):18069-83.
  102. Storey VC, Lukyanenko R, Maass W, Parsons J. Explainable AI. Communications of the ACM. 2022 Apr;65(4):27-9. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3490699. · DOI
  103. Ratti E, Graves M. Explainable machine learning practices: opening another black box for reliable medical AI. AI and Ethics. 2022 Feb. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s43681-022-00141-z. · DOI · Paper page
  104. Kaur H, Nori H, Jenkins S, Caruana R, Wallach H, Wortman Vaughan J. Interpreting Interpretability: Understanding Data Scientists' Use of Interpretability Tools for Machine Learning. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI '20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020. p. 1-14.
  105. Choraś M, Pawlicki M, Puchalski D, Kozik R. Machine Learning -The Results Are Not the only Thing that Matters! What About Security, Explainability and Fairness? In: Krzhizhanovskaya VV, Závodszky G, Lees MH, Dongarra JJ, Sloot PMA, Brissos S, et al., editors. Computational Science -ICCS 2020. vol. 12140. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 615-28.
  106. Giulia Vilone, Luca Longo. Notions of explainability and evaluation approaches for explain- able artificial intelligence. Information Fusion. 2021;76:89-106. Available from: https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1566253521001093.
  107. Brennen A. What Do People Really Want When They Say They Want Explainable AI? We Asked 60 Stakeholders. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI EA '20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020. p. 1-7.
  108. Maltbie N, Niu N, van Doren M, Johnson R. XAI Tools in the Public Sector: A Case Study on Predicting Combined Sewer Overflows. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM Joint Meeting on Euro- pean Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. ESEC/FSE 2021. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 1032-44.
  109. Rasheed K, Qayyum A, Ghaly M, Al-Fuqaha A, Razi A, Qadir J. Explainable, trustworthy, and ethical machine learning for healthcare: A survey. Computers in Biology and Medicine. 2022 Oct;149:106043. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010482522007569.
  110. Saleem R, Yuan B, Kurugollu F, Anjum A, Liu L. Explaining deep neural networks: A survey on the global interpretation methods. Neurocomputing. 2022 Nov;513:165-80. Available from: https: //linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0925231222012218.
  111. Tiddi I, Schlobach S. Knowledge graphs as tools for explainable machine learning: A survey. Arti- ficial Intelligence. 2022 Jan;302:103627. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/ retrieve/pii/S0004370221001788.
  112. Yang G, Ye Q, Xia J. Unbox the black-box for the medical explainable AI via multi-modal and multi- centre data fusion: A mini-review, two showcases and beyond. Information Fusion. 2022 Jan;77:29-52. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1566253521001597.
  113. Saraswat D, Bhattacharya P, Verma A, Prasad VK, Tanwar S, Sharma G, et al. Explainable AI for Healthcare 5.0: Opportunities and Challenges. IEEE Access. 2022;10:84486-517. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9852458/.
  114. Minh D, Wang HX, Li YF, Nguyen TN. Explainable artificial intelligence: a comprehensive review. Artificial Intelligence Review. 2022 Jun;55(5):3503-68. Available from: https://link.springer. com/10.1007/s10462-021-10088-y. · DOI · Paper page
  115. Zhang W, Dimiccoli M, Lim BY. Debiased-CAM to mitigate image perturbations with faithful visual explanations of machine learning. In: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New Orleans LA USA: ACM; 2022. p. 1-32. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/ 3491102.3517522. · DOI
  116. Golder A, Bhat A, Raychowdhury A. Exploration into the Explainability of Neural Network Models for Power Side-Channel Analysis. In: Proceedings of the Great Lakes Symposium on VLSI 2022. Irvine CA USA: ACM; 2022. p. 59-64. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3526241. 3530346. · DOI
  117. Sun J, Liao QV, Muller M, Agarwal M, Houde S, Talamadupula K, et al. Investigating Explain- ability of Generative AI for Code through Scenario-based Design. In: 27th International Con- ference on Intelligent User Interfaces. Helsinki Finland: ACM; 2022. p. 212-28. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3490099.3511119. · DOI · Paper page
  118. Patel N, Shokri R, Zick Y. Model Explanations with Differential Privacy. In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 1895-904. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3531146.3533235. · DOI
  119. Terziyan V, Vitko O. Explainable AI for Industry 4.0: Semantic Representation of Deep Learning Models. Procedia Computer Science. 2022;200:216-26. Available from: https://linkinghub. elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1877050922002290.
  120. Rožanec JM, Fortuna B, Mladenić D. Knowledge graph-based rich and confidentiality preserving Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). Information Fusion. 2022 May;81:91-102. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1566253521002414.
  121. Bacciu D, Numeroso D. Explaining Deep Graph Networks via Input Perturbation. IEEE Transac- tions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems. 2022:1-12. Available from: https://ieeexplore. ieee.org/document/9761788/.
  122. Mery D, Morris B. On Black-Box Explanation for Face Verification. In: 2022 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV). Waikoloa, HI, USA: IEEE; 2022. p. 1194- 203. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9706895/.
  123. Haffar R, Sánchez D, Domingo-Ferrer J. Explaining predictions and attacks in federated learning via random forests. Applied Intelligence. 2022 Apr. Available from: https://link.springer.com/ 10.1007/s10489-022-03435-1. · DOI
  124. Sharma S, Henderson J, Ghosh J. CERTIFAI: A Common Framework to Provide Explanations and Analyse the Fairness and Robustness of Black-Box Models. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Con- ference on AI, Ethics, and Society. AIES '20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Ma- chinery; 2020. p. 166-72.
  125. Sokol K, Flach P. One Explanation Does Not Fit All. KI -Künstliche Intelligenz. 2020;34(2):235-50.
  126. Mohseni S, Zarei N, Ragan ED. A Multidisciplinary Survey and Framework for Design and Evaluation of Explainable AI Systems. ACM Trans Interact Intell Syst. 2021;11(3-4).
  127. Jesus S, Belém C, Balayan V, Bento J, Saleiro P, Bizarro P, et al. How Can I Choose an Explainer? An Application-Grounded Evaluation of Post-Hoc Explanations. In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Con- ference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. FAccT '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 805-15.
  128. Watson M, Shiekh Hasan BA, Moubayed NA. Agree to Disagree: When Deep Learning Models With Identical Architectures Produce Distinct Explanations. In: 2022 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV). Waikoloa, HI, USA: IEEE; 2022. p. 1524-33. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9706847/.
  129. Fel T, Vigouroux D, Cadene R, Serre T. How Good is your Explanation? Algorithmic Stability Mea- sures to Assess the Quality of Explanations for Deep Neural Networks. In: 2022 IEEE/CVF Win- ter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV). Waikoloa, HI, USA: IEEE; 2022. p. 1565-75. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9706798/.
  130. Ehsan U, Liao QV, Muller M, Riedl MO, Weisz JD. Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Trans- parency in AI Systems. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. .
  131. Sun L, Li Z, Zhang Y, Liu Y, Lou S, Zhou Z. Capturing the Trends, Applications, Issues, and Potential Strategies of Designing Transparent AI Agents. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI EA '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. .
  132. Suresh H, Gomez SR, Nam KK, Satyanarayan A. Beyond Expertise and Roles: A Framework to Characterize the Stakeholders of Interpretable Machine Learning and Their Needs. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. .
  133. Tsiakas K, Murray-Rust D. Using human-in-the-loop and explainable AI to envisage new future work practices. In: The15th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Envi- ronments. Corfu Greece: ACM; 2022. p. 588-94. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10. 1145/3529190.3534779. · DOI
  134. Combi C, Amico B, Bellazzi R, Holzinger A, Moore JH, Zitnik M, et al. A manifesto on explainabil- ity for artificial intelligence in medicine. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine. 2022 Nov;133:102423. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0933365722001750.
  135. Hu B, Vasu B, Hoogs A. X-MIR: EXplainable Medical Image Retrieval. In: 2022 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV). Waikoloa, HI, USA: IEEE; 2022. p. 1544- 54. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9706900/.
  136. Padovan PH, Martins CM, Reed C. Black is the new orange: how to determine AI liability. Arti- ficial Intelligence and Law. 2022 Jan. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s10506-022-09308-9. · DOI
  137. Abolfazlian K. Trustworthy AI Needs Unbiased Dictators! In: Maglogiannis I, Iliadis L, Pimenidis E, editors. Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2020. p. 15-23.
  138. Bertino E. Privacy in the Era of 5G, IoT, Big Data and Machine Learning. In: 2020 Second IEEE International Conference on Trust, Privacy and Security in Intelligent Systems and Applications (TPS- ISA); 2020. p. 134-7.
  139. Rahimian S, Orekondy T, Fritz M. Differential Privacy Defenses and Sampling Attacks for Member- ship Inference. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security. AISec '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 193-202. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3474369.3486876. · DOI · Paper page
  140. Ha T, Dang TK, Le H, Truong TA. Security and Privacy Issues in Deep Learning: A Brief Review. SN Computer Science. 2020;1(5):253.
  141. Joos S, Van hamme T, Preuveneers D, Joosen W. Adversarial Robustness is Not Enough: Practical Limitations for Securing Facial Authentication. In: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM on International Workshop on Security and Privacy Analytics. Baltimore MD USA: ACM; 2022. p. 2-12. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3510548.3519369. · DOI
  142. Jankovic A, Mayer R. An Empirical Evaluation of Adversarial Examples Defences, Combinations and Robustness Scores. In: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM on International Workshop on Security and Privacy Analytics. Baltimore MD USA: ACM; 2022. p. 86-92. Available from: https://dl.acm. org/doi/10.1145/3510548.3519370. · DOI
  143. Brown H, Lee K, Mireshghallah F, Shokri R, Tramèr F. What Does it Mean for a Language Model to Preserve Privacy? In: 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Seoul Republic of Korea: ACM; 2022. p. 2280-92. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/ 3531146.3534642. · DOI · Paper page
  144. Giordano M, Maddalena L, Manzo M, Guarracino MR. Adversarial attacks on graph-level embedding methods: a case study. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence. 2022 Oct. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10472-022-09811-4. · DOI
  145. Muhr T, Zhang W. Privacy-Preserving Detection of Poisoning Attacks in Federated Learning. In: 2022 19th Annual International Conference on Privacy, Security & Trust (PST). Fredericton, NB, Canada: IEEE; 2022. p. 1-10. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9851993/.
  146. Ma Z, Ma J, Miao Y, Li Y, Deng RH. ShieldFL: Mitigating Model Poisoning Attacks in Privacy-Preserving Federated Learning. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security. 2022;17:1639-54. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9762272/.
  147. Boulemtafes A, Derhab A, Challal Y. A review of privacy-preserving techniques for deep learning. Neurocomputing. 2020;384:21-45. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0925231219316431.
  148. Chen H, Hussain SU, Boemer F, Stapf E, Sadeghi AR, Koushanfar F, et al. Developing Privacy- preserving AI Systems: The Lessons learned. In: 2020 57th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Confer- ence (DAC); 2020. p. 1-4.
  149. Sousa S, Kern R. How to keep text private? A systematic review of deep learning methods for privacy- preserving natural language processing. Artificial Intelligence Review. 2022 May. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10462-022-10204-6. · DOI
  150. Zhang G, Liu B, Zhu T, Zhou A, Zhou W. Visual privacy attacks and defenses in deep learning: a survey. Artificial Intelligence Review. 2022 Aug;55(6):4347-401. Available from: https://link. springer.com/10.1007/s10462-021-10123-y. · DOI
  151. Sergey Zapechnikov. Privacy-Preserving Machine Learning as a Tool for Secure Personalized In- formation Services. Procedia Computer Science. 2020;169:393-9. Available from: https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050920303598.
  152. Guevara M, Desfontaines D, Waldo J, Coatta T. Differential Privacy: The Pursuit of Protections by Default. Commun ACM. 2021;64(2):36-43.
  153. Suriyakumar VM, Papernot N, Goldenberg A, Ghassemi M. Chasing Your Long Tails: Differentially Private Prediction in Health Care Settings. In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fair- ness, Accountability, and Transparency. FAccT '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 723-34.
  154. Zhu Y, Yu X, Chandraker M, Wang YX. Private-kNN: Practical Differential Privacy for Computer Vision. In: 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2020. p. 11851-9.
  155. Harikumar H, Rana S, Gupta S, Nguyen T, Kaimal R, Venkatesh S. Prescriptive analytics with differ- ential privacy. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics. 2021.
  156. Ding X, Chen L, Zhou P, Jiang W, Jin H. Differentially Private Deep Learning with Iterative Gradient Descent Optimization. ACM/IMS Transactions on Data Science. 2021 Nov;2(4):1-27. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491254. · DOI
  157. Alishahi M, Moghtadaiee V, Navidan H. Add noise to remove noise: Local differential privacy for feature selection. Computers & Security. 2022 Dec;123:102934. Available from: https: //linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167404822003261.
  158. Lal AK, Karthikeyan S. Deep Learning Classification of Fetal Cardiotocography Data with Differen- tial Privacy. In: 2022 International Conference on Connected Systems & Intelligence (CSI). Trivan- drum, India: IEEE; 2022. p. 1-5. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/ 9924087/.
  159. Hassanpour A, Moradikia M, Yang B, Abdelhadi A, Busch C, Fierrez J. Differential Privacy Preser- vation in Robust Continual Learning. IEEE Access. 2022;10:24273-87. Available from: https: //ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9721905/.
  160. Gupta R, Singh AK. A Differential Approach for Data and Classification Service-Based Privacy- Preserving Machine Learning Model in Cloud Environment. New Generation Computing. 2022 Jul. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00354-022-00185-z. · DOI
  161. Liu J, Li X, Wei Q, Liu S, Liu Z, Wang J. A two-phase random forest with differential pri- vacy. Applied Intelligence. 2022 Oct. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s10489-022-04119-6. · DOI
  162. Zhao JZ, Wang XW, Mao KM, Huang CX, Su YK, Li YC. Correlated Differential Privacy of Multiparty Data Release in Machine Learning. Journal of Computer Science and Technology. 2022 Feb;37(1):231- 51. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11390-021-1754-5. · DOI
  163. Arcolezi HH, Couchot JF, Renaud D, Al Bouna B, Xiao X. Differentially private multivariate time series forecasting of aggregated human mobility with deep learning: Input or gradient perturbation? Neural Computing and Applications. 2022 Aug;34(16):13355-69. Available from: https://link. springer.com/10.1007/s00521-022-07393-0. · DOI
  164. Yuan L, Shen G. A Training Scheme of Deep Neural Networks on Encrypted Data. In: Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Cyberspace Innovation of Advanced Technologies. CIAT 2020. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020. p. 490-5.
  165. Park S, Byun J, Lee J. Privacy-Preserving Fair Learning of Support Vector Machine with Homomorphic Encryption. In: Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022. Virtual Event, Lyon France: ACM; 2022. p. 3572-83. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3485447.3512252. · DOI
  166. Liu C, Jiang ZL, Zhao X, Chen Q, Fang J, He D, et al. Efficient and Privacy-Preserving Logistic Re- gression Scheme based on Leveled Fully Homomorphic Encryption. In: IEEE INFOCOM 2022 -IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS). New York, NY, USA: IEEE; 2022. p. 1-6. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9797933/.
  167. Byun J, Park S, Choi Y, Lee J. Efficient homomorphic encryption framework for privacy-preserving regression. Applied Intelligence. 2022 Aug. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10. 1007/s10489-022-04015-z. · DOI
  168. Anh-Tu Tran, The-Dung Luong, Jessada Karnjana, Van-Nam Huynh. An efficient approach for pri- vacy preserving decentralized deep learning models based on secure multi-party computation. Neu- rocomputing. 2021;422:245-62. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0925231220315095.
  169. Wang Q, Feng C, Xu Y, Zhong H, Sheng VS. A novel privacy-preserving speech recognition framework using bidirectional LSTM. Journal of Cloud Computing. 2020;9(1):36.
  170. Liu B, Ding M, Shaham S, Rahayu W, Farokhi F, Lin Z. When Machine Learning Meets Privacy: A Survey and Outlook. ACM Computing Surveys. 2021;54(2).
  171. Bonawitz K, Kairouz P, Mcmahan B, Ramage D. Federated learning and privacy. Communications of the ACM. 2022 Apr;65(4):90-7. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3500240. · DOI
  172. Antunes RS, André da Costa C, Küderle A, Yari IA, Eskofier B. Federated Learning for Healthcare: Systematic Review and Architecture Proposal. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Tech- nology. 2022 Aug;13(4):1-23. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3501813. · DOI · Paper page
  173. Nguyen DC, Pham QV, Pathirana PN, Ding M, Seneviratne A, Lin Z, et al. Federated Learning for Smart Healthcare: A Survey. ACM Computing Surveys. 2023 Apr;55(3):1-37. Available from: https: //dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3501296. · DOI · Paper page
  174. Chowdhury A, Kassem H, Padoy N, Umeton R, Karargyris A. A Review of Medical Federated Learn- ing: Applications in Oncology and Cancer Research. In: Crimi A, Bakas S, editors. Brainlesion: Glioma, Multiple Sclerosis, Stroke and Traumatic Brain Injuries. Cham: Springer International Pub- lishing; 2022. p. 3-24.
  175. Diddee H, Kansra B. CrossPriv: User Privacy Preservation Model for Cross-Silo Federated Software. In: Proceedings of the 35th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering. ASE '20. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2020. p. 1370-2.
  176. Can YS, Ersoy C. Privacy-Preserving Federated Deep Learning for Wearable IoT-Based Biomedical Monitoring. ACM Trans Internet Technol. 2021;21(1).
  177. Chen L, Zhang W, Xu L, Zeng X, Lu Q, Zhao H, et al. A Federated Parallel Data Platform for Trustworthy AI. In: 2021 IEEE 1st International Conference on Digital Twins and Parallel Intelligence (DTPI); 2021. p. 344-7.
  178. Fereidooni H, Marchal S, Miettinen M, Mirhoseini A, Möllering H, Nguyen TD, et al. SAFELearn: Secure Aggregation for private FEderated Learning. In: 2021 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops (SPW); 2021. p. 56-62.
  179. Hao M, Li H, Xu G, Chen H, Zhang T. Efficient, Private and Robust Federated Learning. In: Annual Computer Security Applications Conference. ACSAC. New York, NY, USA: Association for Comput- ing Machinery; 2021. p. 45-60. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3485832.3488014. · DOI
  180. Li KH, de Gusmão PPB, Beutel DJ, Lane ND. Secure aggregation for federated learning in flower. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Workshop on Distributed Machine Learning. DistributedML '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 8-14. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3488659.3493776. · DOI
  181. Xu R, Baracaldo N, Zhou Y, Anwar A, Joshi J, Ludwig H. FedV: Privacy-Preserving Federated Learn- ing over Vertically Partitioned Data. In: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelli- gence and Security. AISec '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 181-92. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3474369.3486872. · DOI
  182. Chai Z, Chen Y, Anwar A, Zhao L, Cheng Y, Rangwala H. FedAT: a high-performance and communication-efficient federated learning system with asynchronous tiers. In: Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis. SC '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 1-16. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3458817.3476211. · DOI
  183. Li Y, Hu G, Liu X, Ying Z. Cross the Chasm: Scalable Privacy-Preserving Federated Learning against Poisoning Attack. In: 2021 18th International Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST); 2021. p. 1-5.
  184. Cho H, Mathur A, Kawsar F. Device or User: Rethinking Federated Learning in Personal-Scale Multi- Device Environments. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems. SenSys '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 446-52. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3485730.3493449. · DOI
  185. Xu T, Zhu K, Andrzejak A, Zhang L. Distributed Learning in Trusted Execution Environment: A Case Study of Federated Learning in SGX. In: 2021 7th IEEE International Conference on Network Intelligence and Digital Content (IC-NIDC); 2021. p. 450-4. ISSN: 2575-4955.
  186. Beilharz J, Pfitzner B, Schmid R, Geppert P, Arnrich B, Polze A. Implicit model specialization through dag-based decentralized federated learning. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Middleware Conference. Middleware '21. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2021. p. 310-22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3464298.3493403. · DOI
  187. Li S, Ngai E, Ye F, Voigt T. Auto-weighted Robust Federated Learning with Corrupted Data Sources. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology. 2022 Oct;13(5):1-20. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3517821. · DOI
  188. Gong Q, Ruan H, Chen Y, Su X. CloudyFL: a cloudlet-based federated learning framework for sensing user behavior using wearable devices. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Embedded and Mobile Deep Learning. Portland Oregon: ACM; 2022. p. 13-8. Available from: https://dl. acm.org/doi/10.1145/3539491.3539592. · DOI
  189. Kalloori S, Klingler S. Cross-silo federated learning based decision trees. In: Proceedings of the 37th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing. Virtual Event: ACM; 2022. p. 1117-24. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3477314.3507149. · DOI
  190. Zhu S, Qi Q, Zhuang Z, Wang J, Sun H, Liao J. FedNKD: A Dependable Federated Learning Us- ing Fine-tuned Random Noise and Knowledge Distillation. In: Proceedings of the 2022 Interna- tional Conference on Multimedia Retrieval. Newark NJ USA: ACM; 2022. p. 185-93. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3512527.3531372. · DOI
  191. Wang N, Xiao Y, Chen Y, Hu Y, Lou W, Hou YT. FLARE: Defending Federated Learning against Model Poisoning Attacks via Latent Space Representations. In: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security. Nagasaki Japan: ACM; 2022. p. 946-58. Available from: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3488932.3517395. · DOI
  192. Wang Z, Yan B, Dong A. Blockchain Empowered Federated Learning for Data Sharing Incentive Mechanism. Procedia Computer Science. 2022;202:348-53. Available from: https://linkinghub. elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1877050922005816.
  193. Giuseppi A, Manfredi S, Menegatti D, Pietrabissa A, Poli C. Decentralized Federated Learning for Nonintrusive Load Monitoring in Smart Energy Communities. In: 2022 30th Mediterranean Confer- ence on Control and Automation (MED). Vouliagmeni, Greece: IEEE; 2022. p. 312-7. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9837291/.
  194. Zhao J, Zhu H, Wang F, Lu R, Liu Z, Li H. PVD-FL: A Privacy-Preserving and Verifiable Decen- tralized Federated Learning Framework. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security. 2022;17:2059-73. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9777682/.
  195. Lo SK, Liu Y, Lu Q, Wang C, Xu X, Paik HY, et al. Towards Trustworthy AI: Blockchain-based Archi- tecture Design for Accountability and Fairness of Federated Learning Systems. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2022:1-1. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9686048/.
  196. Gholami A, Torkzaban N, Baras JS. Trusted Decentralized Federated Learning. IEEE. 2022:6.
  197. Yang Z, Shi Y, Zhou Y, Wang Z, Yang K. Trustworthy Federated Learning via Blockchain. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. 2022:1-1. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/ 9866512/.
  198. Abou El Houda Z, Hafid AS, Khoukhi L, Brik B. When Collaborative Federated Learning Meets Blockchain to Preserve Privacy in Healthcare. IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineer- ing. 2022:1-11. Available from: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9906419/.
  199. Li J, Yan T, Ren P. VFL-R: a novel framework for multi-party in vertical federated learn- ing. Applied Intelligence. 2022 Sep. Available from: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/ s10489-022-04111-0. · DOI
  200. Sav S, Bossuat JP, Troncoso-Pastoriza JR, Claassen M, Hubaux JP. Privacy-preserving federated neural network learning for disease-associated cell classification. Patterns. 2022 May;3(5):100487. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2666389922000721.

200 of 240 shown

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Goellner, S., Tropmann-Frick, M., & Brumen, B.
Affiliations
HAW Hamburg (DE)
ORCID
Tropmann-Frick, Marina
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2403.06910
arXiv
2403.06910
OpenAlex
W4392737489
Cited by
8
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
Keywords
responsible AI, AI regulation, EU AI policy, trust in AI, human-centered AI, AI ethics, model explainability, privacy, AI security, AI governance framework

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review