From bias to black boxes: understanding and managing the risks of AI – an actuarial perspective

Author:

du Preez Valerie,Bennet Shaun,Byrne Matthew,Couloumy Aurelién,Das Arijit,Dessain JeanORCID,Galbraith Richard,King Paul,Mutanga Victor,Schiller Frank,Zaaiman Stefan,Moehrke Patrick,van Heerden Lara

Abstract

Abstract We explore some of the risks related to Artificial Intelligence (AI) from an actuarial perspective based on research from a transregional industry focus group. We aim to define the key gaps and challenges faced when implementing and utilising modern modelling techniques within traditional actuarial tasks from a risk perspective and in the context of professional standards and regulations. We explore best practice guidelines to attempt to define an ideal approach and propose potential next steps to help reach the ideal approach. We aim to focus on the considerations, initially from a traditional actuarial perspective and then, if relevant, consider some implications for non-traditional actuarial work, by way of examples. The examples are not intended to be exhaustive. The group considered potential issues and challenges of using AI, related to the following key themes: Ethical Bias, fairness, and discrimination Individualisation of risk assessment Public interest Professional Interpretability and explainability Transparency, reproducibility, and replicability Validation and governance Lack of relevant skills available Wider themes This paper aims to provide observations that could help inform industry and professional guidelines or discussion or to support industry practitioners. It is not intended to replace current regulation, actuarial standards, or guidelines. The paper is aimed at an actuarial and insurance technical audience, specifically those who are utilising or developing AI, and actuarial industry bodies.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Reference156 articles.

1. Equality Act (2010). Available at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

2. Perkins, S. , Davis, H. , & Du Preez, V. (2020). Practical data science for actuarial tasks a practical example of data science considerations. Modelling, Analytics and Insights in Data Working Party – New Approaches to Current Actuarial Work, available at https://www.actuaries.org.uk/documents/practical-data-science-actuarial-tasks-practical-example-data-science-considerations

3. Casualty Actuarial Society (CAS) Race and Insurance Research Task Force (2021b). Approaches to address racial bias in financial services: lessons for the insurance industry, available at https://www.casact.org/publications-research/research/research-paper-series-race-and-insurance-pricing

4. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) (2022). FG22/5 Final non-handbook guidance for firms on the consumer duty, available at https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/finalised-guidance/fg22-5.pdf

5. Colorado. Legislature (2021). Regular session. SB21-169 restrict insurers’ use of external consumer data as passed by the senate, available at https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb21-169

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3