Informatik-Spektrum

, Volume 39, Issue 6, pp 467–489 | Cite as

Dagstuhl Manifesto

  • Redaktion
FORUM

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen C, Smit I, Wallach W (2005) Artificial morality: Top-down, bottom-up, and hybrid approaches. Ethics Inform Technol 7:149–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson M, Leigh Anderson S, Berenz V (2016) Ensuring Ethical Behaviour from Autonomous Systems. In: Proc AAAI Workshop: Artificial Intelligence Applied to Assistive Technologies and Smart Environments. http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/WS/AAAIW16/paper/view/12555Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson M, Leigh Anderson S (2014) GenEth: A General Ethical Dilemma Analyzer. In: Proc. AAAI, pp. 253–261. http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AAAI/AAAI14/paper/view/8308Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arkin RC, Ulam P, Wagner AR (2012) Moral Decision Making in Autonomous Systems: Enforcement, Moral Emotions, Dignity, Trust, and Deception. In: Proc. IEEE 100(3):571–589. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6099675/?arnumber=6099675Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Broome J (1991) Weighing Goods: Equality, Uncertainty and Time. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Broome J (2004) Weighing Lives. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brown C (2011) Consequentialize This. Ethics 121(4):749–771. www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/660696Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Christie GC (2000) The Notion of an Ideal Audience in Legal Argument. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9520-9Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coleman JL (2002) Risks and Wrongs. Oxford University Press, Oxford. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199253616.001.0001Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dennis LA, Fisher M, Slavkovik M, Webster M (2016) Formal verification of ethical choices in autonomous systems. Robot Auton Syst 77:1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2015.11.012Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dietrich F, List C (2016) What matters and how it matters: a choice-theoretic representation of moral theories. Working paper, London School of Economics. http://personal.lse.ac.uk/list/PDF-files/WhatMatters.pdfGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foot P (1967) The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect in Virtues and Vices. Oxford Review, Number 5. http://philpapers.org/archive/FOOTPO-2.pdfGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    French PA (1984) Collective and Corporate Responsibility. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Halpern JY, Pass R, Seeman L (2014) Decision theory with resource-bounded agents. Topics Cogn Sci 6:245–257. doi:10.1111/tops.12088Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Horty J (2012) Reasons as Defaults. Oxford University Press, New York/OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    List C, Pettit P (2011) Group Agency: The Design, Possibility, and Status of Corporate Agents. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Scanlon TM (1998) What we owe to each other. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674004238&content=reviewsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sergot M (2013) Normative Positions. In: Handbook of Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, edited by: Gabbay D, Horty J, van der Meyden R, Parent X, van der Torre L, Chapter 5, pp. 353–406, College Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slote M (1989) Beyond Optimizing: A Study of Rational Choice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Winfield A, Blum C, Liu W (2014) Towards an Ethical Robot: Internal Models, Consequences and Ethical Action Selection. In: Advances in Autonomous Robotics Systems, edited by: Mistry M, Leonardis A, Witkowski M, Melhuish C, LNCS Vol 8717, pp. 85–96, Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ege B, Humm B, Reibold A (eds) (2015) Corporate Semantic Web – Wie semantische Anwendungen in Unternehmen Nutzen stiften (in German). Springer, ISBN 978-3-642-54885-7Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gernhardt B, Vogel T, Givehchi M, Wang L, Hemmje M (2016) Knowledge-based Production Planning within the Reference Planning Process supporting Manufacturing Change Management. ASME 2016 – Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference (MSEC2016), Blacksburg, VA, USAGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Graefe A, Haim M, Haarmann B, Brosius H-B (2016) Readers’ Perception of Computer-Written News: Credibility, Expertise, and Readability. In: Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism, edited by: Tumber H, Zelizer B, Vol. 17, No. 4. Sage Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nübling D, Fahlbusch F, Heuser R (2015) Namen, 2. Auflage. Narr, TübingenGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hoppe T, Humm B, Schade U, Heuss T, Hemmje M, Vogel T, Gernhardt B (2016) Corporate semantic web – applications, technology, methodology. Informatik-Spektrum 39(1)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wendt M, Büscher C, Herta C, Gerlach M, Messner M, Kemmerer S, Tietze W, Düwiger H (2009) Extracting Domain Terminologies from the World Wide Web. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Web as Corpus Workshop (WAC5), Donostia-San Sebastián, Basque Country, Spain, 7 September 2009, https://www.sigwac.org.uk/attachment/wiki/WAC5/WAC5_proceedings.pdf, last access: 19.8.2016Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mikolov T, Chen K, Corrado G, Dean J (2013) Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space, https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.3781, last access: 19.8.2016Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sowa JF (2004) The Challenge of Knowledge Soup. In: Proc. First International WordNet ConferenceGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schäfermeier R, Paschke A (2014) Aspect-Oriented Ontologies: Dynamic Modularization Using Ontological Metamodeling. In: Formal Ontology in Information Systems – Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference, FOIS 2014, 22–25 September 2014, pp. 199–212, Rio de Janeiro, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schäfermeier R, Paschke A (2016) Weaving Ontology Aspects Using a Catalog of Structural Ontology Design Patterns. In: Proceedings of the 29th International Workshop on Description Logics, Cape Town, South Africa, 22–25 April 2016Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, 10.2.2013, Nr. 6, S. 21; Ch. Siedenbiedel, Tagesspiegel, rtr, Nr. 22202, 2014Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bloomberg News Ed. Pettersson, BofA, Citi Sued by University of California Over Libor 26.6.2013Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Spiegel ONLINE Wirtschaft, St. Kaiser, LiborAffäre: Deutsche Bank wollte Skandalhändler mit 80 Millionen entlohnen, 13.2.2013Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, Ch. Siedenbiedel, Die Libor-Bande, 10.2.2013, Nr. 6, S.21Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Redaktion

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations