• 中国科学学与科技政策研究会
  • 中国科学院科技政策与管理科学研究所
  • 清华大学科学技术与社会研究中心
ISSN 1003-2053 CN 11-1805/G3

科学学研究 ›› 2024, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (1): 10-20.

• 专稿:生成式人工智能治理 • 上一篇    下一篇

数字时代生成式人工智能影响及治理政策导向

陈升1,刘子俊1,张楠2   

  1. 1. 重庆大学公共管理学院
    2. 清华大学公共管理学院
  • 收稿日期:2023-04-26 修回日期:2023-09-12 出版日期:2024-01-15 发布日期:2024-01-15
  • 通讯作者: 刘子俊
  • 基金资助:
    发展规划实施评估与‘善治:基于公共政策过程视角

Generative Artificial Intelligence Impacts and Governance Policy Orientation in the Digital Age

  • Received:2023-04-26 Revised:2023-09-12 Online:2024-01-15 Published:2024-01-15

摘要: 大数据时代下,以ChatGPT为代表的生成式人工智能的发展蕴含着技术革命的契机,也可能带来潜在的社会风险。通过对公众评论文本分析总结并超越文本进行理论推演,可以全面认识生成式人工智能,以提出相应的治理策略。本研究基于Reddit平台中以ChatGPT为主题的公众评论文本,结合LDA模型、情感分析、社会网络分析方法和建构的T-TOE分析模型,探讨以ChatGPT为代表的生成式人工智能技术所带来的影响和冲击。研究发现,公众对生成式人工智能关注广泛,涉及运行机制、运用领域等6个主题。不同主题下公众关注程度不同,最关注技术变革和人机互动两个主题。根据情感分析,公众总体对生成式人工智能保持乐观,特别是对其可能带来的技术变革。随后根据T-TOE分析模型,以ChatGPT为代表的生成式人工智能可以连接不同技术,但具有内生风险;能够提高组织效能,但会产生互动错位,能够实现智能交互,但会导致价值分裂。为此本研究根据研究结论从技术、组织和环境三个维度提出相应的治理策略。

Abstract: In the age of digital transformation, generative AI, exemplified by technologies like ChatGPT, serves as both a catalyst for technological innovation and a potential harbinger of various societal risks. A nuanced and exhaustive understanding of this groundbreaking technology is therefore imperative to harmonize the dual imperatives of technological advancement and effective governance. Employing text analysis techniques to meticulously categorize public comments and formulate theoretical constructs, this research not only offers an incisive look into the inherent complexities and probable societal ramifications of generative AI but also establishes an empirical foundation for crafting governance strategies that are both responsive and responsible. Utilizing a corpus of public commentary on the Reddit platform related to ChatGPT, this study undertakes a multifaceted examination of generative AI. It employs a suite of analytical tools, including Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) models, sentiment analysis, social network analysis, and a bespoke Technology-Technology, Organization, Environment (T-TOE) analytical framework. This comprehensive approach illuminates the various dimensions of generative AI's societal impact. Specifically, the study finds that public discourse largely centers around six core themes, including but not limited to, the technological underpinnings and diverse application domains of generative AI. Among these, issues related to technological transformation and the nuances of human-AI interaction attract heightened attention. Sentiment analysis corroborates a generally optimistic public outlook towards this technology, particularly with regard to its capacity to usher in transformative technological changes. Integrating empirical insights with theoretical extrapolation, the study enables a granular understanding of generative AI. Through the lens of the T-TOE model, the multi-dimensional impact of generative AI is rigorously assessed. In the Technology-Technology dimension, generative AI is posited as a lynchpin for digital and intelligent transformation. Nonetheless, it is accompanied by endogenous technological risks, such as data security vulnerabilities and algorithmic biases, which necessitate vigilant governance. In the Technology-Organization axis, generative AI is expected to substantially enhance organizational efficiency and decision-making prowess. However, the potential for discord between technological adoption and organizational culture—manifesting as managerial missteps or cultural incongruities—raises concerns that warrant careful attention. In the Technology-Environment sphere, generative AI is seen as exerting a pervasive influence on various societal domains through its intelligent capabilities. Yet, lurking beneath are latent risks, including but not limited to, the erosion of privacy norms and the exacerbation of social inequalities, that require preemptive governance measures. In light of these insights, the study concludes by delineating governance strategies across three critical dimensions: technological, organizational, and environmental. In the technological realm, the study advocates for a robust discourse among experts across disciplines to enhance the understanding of inherent risks, coupled with the development of comprehensive technical standards and liability frameworks. Organizationally, it underscores the need for directional guidance from governmental agencies and advocates for a symbiotic collaboration across different sectors, encouraging public-private partnerships for a nuanced approach to governance. Environmentally, the study suggests the construction of a multi-faceted goal system, significant investments in digital infrastructures, and a sustained focus on ensuring both cultural and algorithmic fairness. Taken together, these recommendations offer an integrated governance blueprint, adept at balancing the often competing demands of innovation, societal value, and regulatory order.