The Essence of Ethical Reasoning in Robot-Emotion Processing
As social robots become more and more intelligent and autonomous in operation, it is extremely important to ensure that such robots act in socially acceptable manner. More specifically, if such an autonomous robot is capable of generating and expressing emotions of its own, it should also have an ability to reason if it is ethical to exhibit a particular emotional state in response to a surrounding event. Most existing computational models of emotion for social robots have focused on achieving a certain level of believability of the emotions expressed. We argue that believability of a robot’s emotions, although crucially necessary, is not a sufficient quality to elicit socially acceptable emotions. Thus, we stress on the need of higher level of cognition in emotion processing mechanism which empowers social robots with an ability to decide if it is socially appropriate to express a particular emotion in a given context or it is better to inhibit such an experience. In this paper, we present the detailed mathematical explanation of the ethical reasoning mechanism in our computational model, EEGS, that helps a social robot to reach to the most socially acceptable emotional state when more than one emotions are elicited by an event. Experimental results show that ethical reasoning in EEGS helps in the generation of believable as well as socially acceptable emotions.
KeywordsSocial robots Computational emotion model Believability Ethical reasoning Socially acceptable emotions EEGS
This research is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest with any organisation in relation to this research.
This research was funded by the Research Scholarship provided by the University of Technology Sydney. There is no external funding associated with this research.
- 1.Alexander L, Moore M (2007) Deontological ethics. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/entries/ethics-deontological/
- 4.Anderson M, Anderson SL (2007) Machine ethics: creating an ethical intelligent agent. AI Mag 28(4):15Google Scholar
- 5.Bartneck C (2003) Interacting with an embodied emotional character. In: Proceedings of the 2003 international conference on designing pleasurable products and interfaces. ACM, pp 55–60Google Scholar
- 6.Becker-Asano C (2008) WASABI: affect simulation for agents with believable interactivity, vol 319. IOS Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
- 9.Dias J, Mascarenhas S, Paiva A (2014) Fatima modular: towards an agent architecture with a generic appraisal framework. Emotion modeling. Springer, Berlin, pp 44–56Google Scholar
- 12.Gebhard P (2005) Alma: a layered model of affect. In: Proceedings of the fourth international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems. ACM, pp 29–36Google Scholar
- 14.Hooker J (1996) Three kinds of ethics. Carnegie mellon University. http://public.tepper.cmu.edu/ethics/three.pdf
- 16.Kopp S, Jung B, Lessmann N, Wachsmuth I (2003) Max—a multimodal assistant in virtual reality construction. KI 17(4):11Google Scholar
- 18.Le Blanc AD (1999) Graphical user interface to communicate attitude or emotion to a computer program. US Patent 5,977,968Google Scholar
- 19.Marinier RP, Laird JE (2007) Computational modeling of mood and feeling from emotion. In: Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society, vol 29Google Scholar
- 21.Marsella S, Gratch J, Petta P et al (2010) Computational models of emotion. A blueprint for affective computing—a sourcebook and manual vol 11(1), pp 21–46Google Scholar
- 23.Ojha S, Williams MA (2016) Ethically-guided emotional responses for social robots: Should i be angry? In: International conference on social robotics. Springer, Berlin, pp 233–242Google Scholar
- 24.Ojha S, Williams MA (2017) A domain-independent approach of cognitive appraisal augmented by higher cognitive layer of ethical reasoning. In: Annual meeting of the Cognitive Science SocietyGoogle Scholar
- 25.Ojha S, Williams MA (2017) Emotional appraisal: a computational perspective. In: Annual conference on advances in cognitive systemsGoogle Scholar
- 26.Ortony A, Clore GL, Collins A (1990) The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- 27.Padgham L, Taylor G (1997) A system for modelling agents having emotion and personality. International Workshop on Intelligent Agent Systems. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- 28.Plutchik R (1997) The circumplex as a general model of the structure of emotions and personality. In: Plutchik R, Conte H.R (eds) Circumplex models of personality and emotions. American Psychological Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 30.Reilly WN (2006) Modeling what happens between emotional antecedents and emotional consequents. Symposium on agent construction and emotionsGoogle Scholar
- 31.Reilly WS (1996) Believable social and emotional agents. Tech. rep., Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PAGoogle Scholar
- 32.Scherer KR (2001) Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. Apprais Process Emot Theory Methods Res 92(120):57Google Scholar