Luis-Daniel Ibáñez,John Domingue,Sabrina Kirrane,Oshani Seneviratne,Aisling Third,Maria-Esther Vidal
Abstract:Knowledge Graphs (KGs) have emerged as fundamental platforms for powering intelligent decision-making and a wide range of Artificial Intelligence (AI) services across major corporations such as Google, Walmart, and AirBnb. KGs complement Machine Learning (ML) algorithms by providing data context and semantics, thereby enabling further inference and question-answering capabilities. The integration of KGs with neuronal learning (e.g., Large Language Models (LLMs)) is currently a topic of active research, commonly named neuro-symbolic AI. Despite the numerous benefits that can be accomplished with KG-based AI, its growing ubiquity within online services may result in the loss of self-determination for citizens as a fundamental societal issue. The more we rely on these technologies, which are often centralised, the less citizens will be able to determine their own destinies. To counter this threat, AI regulation, such as the European Union (EU) AI Act, is being proposed in certain regions. The regulation sets what technologists need to do, leading to questions concerning: How can the output of AI systems be trusted? What is needed to ensure that the data fuelling and the inner workings of these artefacts are transparent? How can AI be made accountable for its decision-making? This paper conceptualises the foundational topics and research pillars to support KG-based AI for self-determination. Drawing upon this conceptual framework, challenges and opportunities for citizen self-determination are illustrated and analysed in a real-world scenario. As a result, we propose a research agenda aimed at accomplishing the recommended objectives.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
### Problems the Paper Attempts to Solve
The paper aims to address the fundamental social issue of the loss of citizen self-determination caused by the increasing prevalence of Knowledge Graphs (KGs) in artificial intelligence (AI) applications. As KG-based AI technologies become widely used, especially in large enterprises, this centralization trend may lead to citizens being unable to autonomously determine their own fate. To counter this threat, some regions have proposed AI regulatory measures, such as the EU's AI Act. This act stipulates regulations that technical experts need to follow to ensure the trustworthiness of AI system outputs, transparency of data and internal mechanisms, and accountability of AI for its decisions.
### Main Research Directions
The paper proposes a research agenda aimed at ensuring that KG-based AI methods promote rather than hinder user self-determination. Specifically, the paper revolves around three core research themes:
1. **Trust**: Exploring how to increase transparency through mechanisms that enable KG-based AI systems to demonstrate reliability, authenticity, and capability. This includes comprehensive data source and data element provenance tracking, repeatable understanding of all KG-based AI reasoning, and mitigation mechanisms when KG-based AI system responses are not authentic.
2. **Accountability**: Discussing how to ensure that data scientists, computer scientists, and software engineers follow best practices and comply with relevant regulations. In the purely symbolic world, these attributes can be achieved through consistency and compliance checks based on policy languages such as LegalRuleML and ODRL. In the sub-symbolic world, this is particularly challenging due to the often opaque nature of machine learning algorithms. In recent years, various explainable AI (XAI) techniques have been used to construct or apply to model outputs, making them understandable and interpretable by different stakeholders.
3. **Autonomy**: Defined from the perspective of self-determination theory as "believing that one can choose one's own behavior and actions." In the current context, this means that individuals should be able to autonomously decide how to use KG-based AI and its use of personal data (and respect their wishes). Assuming AI systems can become trustworthy and accountable, how best to support this autonomy? If we can know that AI will behave in expected and known ways, and its decisions and processes are transparent and traceable, how to express and enable individual control over its behavior?
### Practical Application Scenarios
The paper illustrates these issues through a healthcare scenario inspired by the recently proposed European Health Data Space regulation, which aims to ensure EU natural persons have effective control over their electronic health data and to facilitate access to health data by various stakeholders to promote better diagnosis, treatment, and well-being. This scenario includes the following participants and interactions:
- **Individuals managing their Personal Knowledge Graphs (PKG)**: Collecting knowledge about their medical conditions, symptoms, treatments, and treatment responses.
- **Healthcare experts also have PKGs**: Collecting knowledge about diseases, outcomes of previously recommended treatments, and links to general medical knowledge graphs.
- **Knowledge-sharing communities**: Individuals and healthcare experts can share subsets of their PKGs within specific knowledge contexts, forming community KGs.
- **Public and private organizations**: Consulting with the community to access data and knowledge to train large KG-based AI models, thereby improving internal processes or providing products and services to the community, experts, or individuals.
### Conclusion
The paper proposes a research roadmap that includes multiple challenges and opportunities aimed at promoting the development of KG-based AI in a way that benefits both individuals and society. By addressing the three core issues of trust, accountability, and autonomy, the paper hopes to advance the establishment of a more transparent, trustworthy, and responsible AI ecosystem.