How to Implement Responsible AI Release Strategies

"this toolkit shows you how to identify, monitor and mitigate the ‘hidden’ behavioural and organisational risks associated with AI roll-outs. These are the unintended consequences that can arise from how well-intentioned people, teams and organisations interact with AI solutions. Who is this toolkit for? This toolkit is designed for individuals and teams responsible for implementing AI tools and services within organisations and those involved in AI governance. It is intended to be used once you have identified a clear business need for an AI tool and want to ensure that your tool is set up for success. If an AI solution has already been implemented within your organisation, you can use this toolkit to assess risks posed and design a holistic risk management approach. You can use the Mitigating Hidden AI Risks Toolkit to: • Assess the barriers your target users and organisation may experience to using your tool safely and responsibly • Pre-empt the behavioural and organisational risks that could emerge from scaling your AI tools • Develop robust risk management approaches and mitigation strategies to support users, teams and organisations to use your tool safely and responsibly • Design effective AI safety training programmes for your users • Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of your risk mitigations to ensure you not only minimise risk, but maximise the positive impact of your tool for your organisation" A very practical guide to behavioural considerations in managing risk by Dr Moira Nicolson and others at the UK Cabinet Office, which builds on the MIT AI Risk Repository.

Concerned about agentic AI risks cascading through your system? Consider these emerging smart practices which adapt existing AI governance best practices for agentic AI, reinforcing a "responsible by design" approach and encompassing the AI lifecycle end-to-end: ✅ Clearly define and audit the scope, robustness, goals, performance, and security of each agent's actions and decision-making authority. ✅ Develop "AI stress tests" and assess the resilience of interconnected AI systems ✅ Implement "circuit breakers" (a.k.a kill switches or fail-safes) that can isolate failing models and prevent contagion, limiting the impact of individual AI agent failures. ✅ Implement human oversight and observability across the system, not necessarily requiring a human-in-the-loop for each agent or decision (caveat: take a risk-based, use-case dependent approach here!). ✅ Test new agents in isolated / sand-box environments that mimic real-world interactions before productionizing ✅ Ensure teams responsible for different agents share knowledge about potential risks, understand who is responsible for interventions and controls, and document who is accountable for fixes. ✅ Implement real-time monitoring and anomaly detection to track KPIs, anomalies, errors, and deviations to trigger alerts.

If you are an AI engineer, thinking how to choose the right foundational model, this one is for you 👇 Whether you’re building an internal AI assistant, a document summarization tool, or real-time analytics workflows, the model you pick will shape performance, cost, governance, and trust. Here’s a distilled framework that’s been helping me and many teams navigate this: 1. Start with your use case, then work backwards. Craft your ideal prompt + answer combo first. Reverse-engineer what knowledge and behavior is needed. Ask: → What are the real prompts my team will use? → Are these retrieval-heavy, multilingual, highly specific, or fast-response tasks? → Can I break down the use case into reusable prompt patterns? 2. Right-size the model. Bigger isn’t always better. A 70B parameter model may sound tempting, but an 8B specialized one could deliver comparable output, faster and cheaper, when paired with: → Prompt tuning → RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) → Instruction tuning via InstructLab Try the best first, but always test if a smaller one can be tuned to reach the same quality. 3. Evaluate performance across three dimensions: → Accuracy: Use the right metric (BLEU, ROUGE, perplexity). → Reliability: Look for transparency into training data, consistency across inputs, and reduced hallucinations. → Speed: Does your use case need instant answers (chatbots, fraud detection) or precise outputs (financial forecasts)? 4. Factor in governance and risk Prioritize models that: → Offer training traceability and explainability → Align with your organization’s risk posture → Allow you to monitor for privacy, bias, and toxicity Responsible deployment begins with responsible selection. 5. Balance performance, deployment, and ROI Think about: → Total cost of ownership (TCO) → Where and how you’ll deploy (on-prem, hybrid, or cloud) → If smaller models reduce GPU costs while meeting performance Also, keep your ESG goals in mind, lighter models can be greener too. 6. The model selection process isn’t linear, it’s cyclical. Revisit the decision as new models emerge, use cases evolve, or infra constraints shift. Governance isn’t a checklist, it’s a continuous layer. My 2 cents 🫰 You don’t need one perfect model. You need the right mix of models, tuned, tested, and aligned with your org’s AI maturity and business priorities. ------------ If you found this insightful, share it with your network ♻️ Follow me (Aishwarya Srinivasan) for more AI insights and educational content ❤️

This new white paper "Steps Toward AI Governance" summarizes insights from the 2024 EqualAI Summit, cosponsored by RAND in D.C. in July 2024, where senior executives discussed AI development and deployment, challenges in AI governance, and solutions for these issues across government and industry sectors. Link: https://lnkd.in/giDiaCA3 * * * The white paper outlines several technical and organizational challenges that impact effective AI governance: Technical Challenges: 1) Evaluation of External Models:  Difficulties arise in assessing externally sourced AI models due to unclear testing standards and development transparency, in contrast to in-house models, which can be customized and fine-tuned to fit specific organizational needs. 2) High-Risk Use Cases: Prioritizing the evaluation of AI use cases with high risks is challenging due to the diverse and unpredictable outputs of AI, particularly generative AI. Traditional evaluation metrics may not capture all vulnerabilities, suggesting a need for flexible frameworks like red teaming. Organizational Challenges: 1) Misaligned Incentives: Organizational goals often conflict with the resource-intensive demands of implementing effective AI governance, particularly when not legally required. Lack of incentives for employees to raise concerns and the absence of whistleblower protections can lead to risks being overlooked. 2) Company Culture and Leadership: Establishing a culture that values AI governance is crucial but challenging. Effective governance requires authority and buy-in from leadership, including the board and C-suite executives. 3) Employee Buy-In: Employee resistance, driven by job security concerns, complicates AI adoption, highlighting the need for targeted training. 4) Vendor Relations: Effective AI governance is also impacted by gaps in technical knowledge between companies and vendors, leading to challenges in ensuring appropriate AI model evaluation and transparency. * * * Recommendations for Companies: 1) Catalog AI Use Cases: Maintain a centralized catalog of AI tools and applications, updated regularly to track usage and document specifications for risk assessment. 2) Standardize Vendor Questions: Develop a standardized questionnaire for vendors to ensure evaluations are based on consistent metrics, promoting better integration and governance in vendor relationships. 3) Create an AI Information Tool: Implement a chatbot or similar tool to provide clear, accessible answers to AI governance questions for employees, using diverse informational sources. 4) Foster Multistakeholder Engagement: Engage both internal stakeholders, such as C-suite executives, and external groups, including end users and marginalized communities. 5) Leverage Existing Processes: Utilize established organizational processes, such as crisis management and technical risk management, to integrate AI governance more efficiently into current frameworks.