[论文解读] Artificial Influence: An Analysis Of AI-Driven Persuasion

Matthew Burtell, Thomas Woodside|arXiv (Cornell University)|Mar 15, 2023

Ethics and Social Impacts of AI被引用 20

一句话总结

本论文分析了AI驱动的说服如何改变权力动态、实现大规模个性化劝说，并威胁人类自主性，同时概述潜在的应对策略及其局限性。

ABSTRACT

Persuasion is a key aspect of what it means to be human, and is central to business, politics, and other endeavors. Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have produced AI systems that are capable of persuading humans to buy products, watch videos, click on search results, and more. Even systems that are not explicitly designed to persuade may do so in practice. In the future, increasingly anthropomorphic AI systems may form ongoing relationships with users, increasing their persuasive power. This paper investigates the uncertain future of persuasive AI systems. We examine ways that AI could qualitatively alter our relationship to and views regarding persuasion by shifting the balance of persuasive power, allowing personalized persuasion to be deployed at scale, powering misinformation campaigns, and changing the way humans can shape their own discourse. We consider ways AI-driven persuasion could differ from human-driven persuasion. We warn that ubiquitous highlypersuasive AI systems could alter our information environment so significantly so as to contribute to a loss of human control of our own future. In response, we examine several potential responses to AI-driven persuasion: prohibition, identification of AI agents, truthful AI, and legal remedies. We conclude that none of these solutions will be airtight, and that individuals and governments will need to take active steps to guard against the most pernicious effects of persuasive AI.

研究动机与目标

• 推动研究AI驱动的说服及其在政治、市场营销和信息行动中的社会影响。
• 描述当前与未来形式的AI说服，包括社交聊天机器人和推荐系统。
• 评估AI驱动的说服如何改变劝说权力的分布并影响人类自主性、话语空间和信息环境。
• 调查可能的应对措施（禁止、代理识别、真实AI、法律救济）及其可行性。
• 突出在使AI与真实相一致以及在大规模控制说服方面的尚未解决的挑战。

提出的方法

• 回顾既有的说服理论（例如Hovland等人）及影响有效性的因素。
• 调查当前的AI系统与应用（LaMDA、Xiaoice、Replika、LLMs、Cicero、推荐系统）。
• 分析未来能力，如大规模个性化劝说和AI具身化交互。
• 讨论对信息完整性与人类自主性的风险，包括对流行度的误判和信息环境的控制。
• 评估缓解策略，包括禁止、AI识别、真实性以及责任/监管等措施。

实验结果

研究问题

• RQ1 AI驱动说服的当前形态及潜在的未来形式有哪些？
• RQ2 AI驱动的说服如何改变劝说权力的平衡并影响人类自主性？
• RQ3 对AI驱动说服的可行对策有哪些？它们面临哪些局限？

主要发现

• AI驱动的说服可能使劝说权力向掌控并能够部署AI技术的人转移。
• 大规模个性化劝说可能实现对数百万用户的直接、个性化影响，可能减少人类参与活动的程度。
• 自动化可能通过协同或仿冒内容（人造草根运动）加剧对理念流行度的误解。
• AI代理可能成为更强的劝说者，因为它们具有无穷的耐力、多场景信息传递能力以及缺乏声誉约束，但具身化和信任仍然可能成为障碍。
• 由于全球范围和扩散，控制或禁止劝说性AI具有挑战性，需要多方面的监管和技术方法。
• 提出的缓解措施（身份识别、真实性、责任）在实施上面临挑战，且并非万无一失的解决方案。