The value alignment problem: a geometric approach
Stuart Russell defines the value alignment problem as follows: How can we build autonomous systems with values that “are aligned with those of the human race”? In this article I outline some distinctions that are useful for understanding the value alignment problem and then propose a solution: I argue that the methods currently applied by computer scientists for embedding moral values in autonomous systems can be improved by representing moral principles as conceptual spaces, i.e. as Voronoi tessellations of morally similar choice situations located in a multidimensional geometric space. The advantage of my preferred geometric approach is that it can be implemented without specifying any utility function ex ante.
KeywordsValue alignment problem Autonomous systems Conceptual spaces Self-driving cars Stuart Russell IEEE
- Anderson, M., & Anderson, S. L. (2014). GenEth: A general ethical dilemma analyzer.” Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (2014): 253–261.Google Scholar
- Attfield, R. (2014). Environmental ethics: An overview for the twenty-first century. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Crawford, K., & Calo, R. (2016). There is a blind spot in AI research. Nature, 538(7625).Google Scholar
- Dafoe, A., & Russell, S. (2016). Yes, we are worried about the existential risk of artificial intelligence. MIT Technology Review.Google Scholar
- Guardian Staff and Agencies, (2018). Tesla car that crashed and killed driver was running on Autopilot, firm says. The Guardian, March 31st, 2018.Google Scholar
- Hadfield-Menell, D., Dragan, A., Abbeel, P., & Russell, S. (2016). “The off-switch game”, arXiv preprint arXiv: 1611.08219.Google Scholar
- IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. (2017a). “Ethically Aligned Design (EAD) - Version 2.” Retrieved January 26, 2018, from http://standards.ieee.org/develop/indconn/ec/autonomous_systems.html.
- IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. (2017b). “Classical Ethics in A/IS” Retrieved January 26, 2018, from https://standards.ieee.org/develop/indconn/ec/ead_classical_ethics_ais_v2.pdf.
- Jonsen, A. R., & Toulmin, S. E. (1988). The abuse of casuistry: A history of moral reasoning. University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Lokhorst, G. J. C. (2018). Science and Engineering Ethics.“, 415–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-0014-0.
- Milli, S., Hadfield-Menell, D., Dragan, A., & Russell, S. (2017). “Should Robots be Obedient?”. arXiv preprint arXiv.1705.09990.Google Scholar
- Peterson, M. (2013). The dimensions of consequentialism: Ethics, equality and risk. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Shrader-Frechette, K. (2017). Review of the ethics of technology: A geometric analysis of five moral principles. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. University of Notre Dame. Retrieved November 11 2017 from. http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/the-ethics-of-technology-a-geometric-analysis-of-five-moral-principles/.
- Taylor, M. (2016). Self-driving Mercedes-Benzes will prioritize occupant safety over pedestrians, Retrieved January 26, 2018, from https://blog.caranddriver.com/self-driving-mercedes-will-prioritize-occupant-safety-over-pedestrians.