AIGP practice question 14 of 25

CASE STUDY A global marketing agency is adapting a large language model ("LLM") to generate content for an upcoming marketing campaign for a client's…

CASE STUDY A global marketing agency is adapting a large language model ("LLM") to generate content for an upcoming marketing campaign for a client's new product: a hard hat designed for construction workers of any gender to better protect them from head injuries. The marketing agency is accessing the LLM through an application programming interface ("API")developed by a third-party technology company. They want to generate text to be used for targeted advertising communications that highlight the benefits of the hard hat to potential purchasers. Both the marketing agency and the technology company have taken reasonable steps to address Al governance. The marketing company has: • Entered into a contract with the technology company with suitable representations and warranties. • Completed an impact assessment on the LLM for this intended use. • Built technical guidance on how to measure and mitigate bias in the LLM. • Enabled technical aspects of transparency, explainability, robustness and privacy. • Followed applicable regulatory requirements. • Created specific legal statements and disclosures regarding the use of the Al on its client's advertising. The technology company has: • Provided guidance and resources to developers to address environmental concerns. • Build technical guidance on how to measure and mitigate bias in the LLM. • Provided tools and resources to measure bias specific to the LLM. • Enabled technical aspects of transparency, explainability, robustness and privacy. • Mapped and mitigated potential societal harms and large-scale impacts. • Followed applicable regulatory requirements and industry standards. • Created specific legal statements and disclosures regarding the LLM. including with respect to IP and rights to data. The agency has taken governance actions such as: Conducting an impact assessment Providing legal disclosures Enabling bias mitigation and explainability Complying with regulatory requirements Which of the following should be included in the marketing company’s disclosures about the use of the LLM EXCEPT?

Answer options

A: Intended purpose

B: Proprietary methods Correct answer

C: Compliance with law

D: Acknowledgement of limitations

Correct Answer:

B. Proprietary methods

Explanation

Effective AI governance requires transparency, but this does not extend to the mandatory disclosure of proprietary methods or trade secrets. While the marketing company should be transparent about the AI's purpose, its limitations, and its adherence to legal standards, revealing the underlying proprietary algorithms of the third-party LLM is not a standard or required practice. Disclosing such information would compromise the technology company's intellectual property and competitive advantage. The principle of explainability focuses on making the outcomes and general logic of an AI system understandable, not on revealing its source code or specific architectural details.

Why Incorrect

A. Intended purpose: Disclosing the purpose of the AI system is a fundamental aspect of transparency, ensuring stakeholders understand why and how the technology is being used.
C. Compliance with law: A disclosure of legal compliance is a standard component of corporate governance and risk management, providing assurance to clients, users, and regulators.
D. Acknowledgement of limitations: Acknowledging potential inaccuracies, biases, or other limitations is a key principle of responsible and trustworthy AI, managing user expectations and preventing over-reliance.

References

1. NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)

January 2023.

Section 4.2.2

Page 23: The framework states that the level of transparency can be "constrained by law

policy

or confidentiality considerations (e.g.

intellectual property

trade secrets

or privacy)." This directly supports that proprietary methods are an exception to full disclosure.

2. OECD

"Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence

" OECD/LEGAL/0449

2019 (updated 2024).

Principle 1.4

"Transparency and explainability": This principle calls for providing "meaningful information

appropriate to the context." This contextual approach allows organizations to balance the need for transparency with the legitimate need to protect intellectual property and trade secrets.

3. European Commission's High-Level Expert Group on AI

"Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI

" April 8

2019.

Chapter II

Page 15 (under "The requirement of Transparency"): The guidelines state

"The transparency requirement must also be balanced against the need to protect intellectual property rights and trade secrets... a trade-off may be needed between transparency and security." This explicitly acknowledges that proprietary information should be protected.

Keep practicing

Take the free AIGP practice test

Ten exam-style questions with answers and explanations, plus the exam facts and study guides.

Start the free practice test