Ethical considerations in the development of the Digital Twins of the Ocean
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In recent years, Digital Twins of the Ocean (DTOs) - digital replicas of ocean processes - have emerged as a tool for modelling the complex interactions that govern marine systems, exploiting the power of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and large training datasets to understand ocean processes and predict their future in a rapidly environmentally changing world. DTOs, although very complex, offer many advantages including providing a decision support tool for areas such as optimizing fisheries, emergency reactions to tsunami warnings, adapting to sea-level rise, protection of biodiversity and improving climate prediction/climate forecast. These powerful tools offer many promises; however, we need to go beyond the technical aspects and consider AIs impact on the decision-making process.Three key aspects of the coupling model/AI are essential for consideration by the marine scientific commmunity, the Artificial Intelligence and policy-maker communities. The hope is that by considering the limitations early in development, we can optimize the use of AI. The key aspects to consider are:Data is of paramount importance: the source of data, its geographical origin, its nature and its quality should be carefully considered when developing a DTO. The need for seamless interoperability of these data raises the question of which data standards are selected and how they are applied. All these considerations may introduce biases into the algorithms, which need to be identified: in specific cases, the use of open-access data may introduce bias as it may not have access to sources related to endangered species or Indigenous knowledge. Furthermore, data openness for DTO models may have ethical limitations such as compliance to Access and Benefit Sharing regulations, or sharing of data from commercially valuable or endangered species, which question the conditions under which data should be made open. The model itself is a mathematical object, based on physical conservation principles and a set of hypotheses that guaranty the consistency of the reasoning. It also comes with certain limitations and uncertainties, especially in the biological modelling and always involves some numerical approximation for being solved within the available computational power. This process of model development and use, and the benefits and limitations that users assume the models may contain, must be transparent and accountable as highlighted in the European guidelines on Trustworthy AI. Finally, the result we expect from the data-driven DTOs is a powerful decision-support tool, capable of predicting and warning. These tools need to be explicit and targeted to the end-users, leveraging the complexities of the analyses and ensuring that the results and choices of data and models ensure transparency and present all biases and uncertainties, to allow the end user to draw reasonable conclusions. End-user training is an essential aspect to consider. The decision-making chain of command must be solid, well identified and structured, and accountability is key, especially in crisis management due to natural hazards. It is urgent that marine scientists, AI developers and policy makers work together for the best for the planet.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,192 | 0,296 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,031 |
| Communication savante | 0,018 | 0,019 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,013 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,026 | 0,042 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».