mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Ethics as a service: a pragmatic operationalisation of AI Ethics

arXiv 2102.09364 ↗First posted 11 Feb 2021cs.CYcited by 19

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As the range of potential uses for Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular machine learning (ML), has increased, so has awareness of the associated ethical issues. This increased awareness has led to the realisation that existing legislation and regulation provides insufficient protection to individuals, groups, society, and the environment from AI harms. In response to this realisation, there has been a proliferation of principle-based ethics codes, guidelines and frameworks. However, it has become increasingly clear that a significant gap exists between the theory of AI ethics principles and the practical design of AI systems. In previous work, we analysed whether it is possible to close this gap between the what and the how of AI ethics through the use of tools and methods designed to help AI developers, engineers, and designers translate principles into practice. We concluded that this method of closure is currently ineffective as almost all existing translational tools and methods are either too flexible (and thus vulnerable to ethics washing) or too strict (unresponsive to context). This raised the question: if, even with technical guidance, AI ethics is challenging to embed in the process of algorithmic design, is the entire pro-ethical design endeavour rendered futile? And, if no, then how can AI ethics be made useful for AI practitioners? This is the question we seek to address here by exploring why principles and technical translational tools are still needed even if they are limited, and how these limitations can be potentially overcome by providing theoretical grounding of a concept that has been termed Ethics as a Service.

Key facts. Cited by 19 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 11 Feb 2021.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 1; 2023: 7; 2024: 4; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

19 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2021Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Supportcited by 61
  2. 2024Recent Advances in Generative AI and Large Language Models: Current Status, Challenges, and Perspectivescited by 30
  3. 2022Law Informs Code: A Legal Informatics Approach to Aligning Artificial Intelligence with Humanscited by 23
  4. 2021AI Ethics Principles in Practice: Perspectives of Designers and Developerscited by 12
  5. 2024Auditing of AI: Legal, Ethical and Technical Approachescited by 9
  6. 2023Ethics in the Age of AI: An Analysis of AI Practitioners' Awareness and Challengescited by 6
  7. 2021Some Critical and Ethical Perspectives on the Empirical Turn of AI Interpretabilitycited by 5
  8. 2023Minimum Levels of Interpretability for Artificial Moral Agentscited by 5
  9. 2023Investigating Responsible AI for Scientific Research: An Empirical Studycited by 4
  10. 2024Comprehensive AI Assessment Framework: Enhancing Educational Evaluation with Ethical AI Integrationcited by 3
  11. 2025Advancing Responsible Innovation in Agentic AI: A study of Ethical Frameworks for Household Automationcited by 3
  12. 2023Positive AI: Key Challenges in Designing Artificial Intelligence for Wellbeingcited by 1
7 more
  1. 2026Trustworthy AI Posture (TAIP): A Framework for Continuous AI Assurance of Agentic Systems at Horizontal and Vertical scalecited by 1
  2. 2023Fairness: from the ethical principle to the practice of Machine Learning development as an ongoing agreement with stakeholderscited by 0
  3. 2023Artificial Intelligence Ethics Education in Cybersecurity: Challenges and Opportunities: a focus group reportcited by 0
  4. 2023Towards a Feminist Metaethics of AIcited by 0
  5. 2024The Switch, the Ladder, and the Matrix: Models for Classifying AI Systemscited by 0
  6. 2025Fairness-in-the-Workflow: How Machine Learning Practitioners at Big Tech Companies Approach Fairness in Recommender Systemscited by 0
  7. 2026A Critical Analysis of Trustworthy AI Tools, Mark Frameworks, and the Implementation Chasmscited by 0