Santoni de Sio F, van den Hoven J (2018) Meaningful human control over autonomous systems: a philosophical account. Front Robot AI. 5:15
Article
Google Scholar
Friedman B (1997) Human values and the design of computer technology. In: Friedman B (ed) CSLI Publications
van den Hoven J, Manders-Huits N (2009) Value-sensitive design. In: A companion to the philosophy of technology, Wiley-Blackwell, pp 477–480. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444310795.ch86
Friedman B, Kahn Jr PH (2003) Human values, ethics, and design. Hum-Comput Interact Handb:1177–1201
Yampolskiy RV (2017) What are the ultimate limits to computational techniques: verifier theory and unverifiability. Phys Scr 92(9):93001
Article
Google Scholar
Umbrello S (2018) The moral psychology of value sensitive design: the methodological issues of moral intuitions for responsible innovation. J Respons Innov 5(2):186–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2018.1457401
Article
Google Scholar
Friedman B, Kahn PH, Borning A, Huldtgren A (2013) Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Doorn N, Schuurbiers D, van de Poel I, Gorman ME (eds) Early engagement and new technologies: opening up the laboratory. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 55–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4
Chapter
Google Scholar
Friedman B, Hendry DG, Borning A (2017) A survey of value sensitive design methods. Found Trends Hum-Comput Interact 11(2):63–125. https://doi.org/10.1561/1100000015
Article
Google Scholar
Oosterlaken I (2015) Applying value sensitive design (VSD) to wind turbines and wind parks: an exploration. Sci Eng Ethics 21(2):359–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9536-x
Article
Google Scholar
van Wynsberghe A (2012) Designing robots with care: creating an ethical framework for the future design and implementation of care robots. University of Twente. https://doi.org/10.3990/1.9789036533911
Article
Google Scholar
van Wynsberghe A (2016) Service robots, care ethics, and design. Ethics Inf Technol 18(4):311–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-016-9409-x
Article
Google Scholar
Umbrello S, De Bellis AF (2018) A value-sensitive design approach to intelligent agents. In: Yampolskiy RV (ed) Artificial intelligence safety and security, CRC Press, pp 395–410. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17162.77762
Umbrello S (2019) Beneficial artificial intelligence coordination by means of a value sensitive design approach. Big Data Cogn Comput 3(1):5. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc3010005
Article
Google Scholar
Umbrello S (2019) Atomically precise manufacturing and responsible innovation. Int J Technoethics 10(2):1–21. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJT.2019070101
Article
Google Scholar
Timmermans J, Zhao Y, van den Hoven J (2011) Ethics and nanopharmacy: value sensitive design of new drugs. NanoEthics 5(3):269–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-011-0135-x
Article
Google Scholar
Contissa G, Lagioia F, Sartor G (2017) The ethical knob: ethically-customisable automated vehicles and the law. Artif Intell Law 25(3):365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-017-9211-z
Article
Google Scholar
Thornton SM, Lewis FE, Zhang V, Kochenderfer MJ, Gerdes JC (2018) Value sensitive design for autonomous vehicle motion planning. In: 2018 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV); IEEE, pp 1157–1162
Dogan E, Chatila R, Chauvier S, Evans K, Hadjixenophontos P, Perrin J (2016) Ethics in the design of automated vehicles: the AVEthics project. In: CEUR workshop proceedings; pp 10–13
Contissa G, Lagioia F, Sartor G (2017) Accidents involving autonomous vehicles: legal issues and ethical dilemmas. JUSLETTER:1–7
Gupta A (2019) Machine learning algorithms in autonomous driving https://iiot-world.com/machine-learning/machine-learning-algorithms-in-autonomous-driving/. Accessed 16 Jul 2019
Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Floridi L (2016) European union regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a “right to explanation”. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v38i3.2741
Leben D (2017) A Rawlsian algorithm for autonomous vehicles. Ethics Inf Technol 19(2):107–115
Article
Google Scholar
Pitt J, Diaconescu A (2016) Interactive self-governance and value-sensitive design for self-organising socio-technical systems. In: 2016 IEEE 1st international workshops on foundations and applications of self* systems (FAS*W), pp 30–35. https://doi.org/10.1109/FAS-W.2016.20
Davis J, Nathan LP (2014) Value sensitive design: applications, adaptations, and critiques. In: van den Hoven J, Vermaas PE, van de Poel I (eds) Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: sources, theory, values and application domains. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6994-6_3-1
Chapter
Google Scholar
Friedman B, Hendry DG, Huldtgren A, Jonker C, Van den Hoven J, Van Wynsberghe A (2015) Charting the Next decade for value sensitive design. Aarhus Ser Hum Centered Comput 1(1):4. https://doi.org/10.7146/aahcc.v1i1.21619
Article
Google Scholar
Friedman B, Kahn PH Jr (2003) Human values, ethics, and design. In: Jacko JA, Sears A (eds) The human-computer interaction handbook. L. Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, pp 1177–1201
Google Scholar
van den Hoven J, Lokhorst GJ, van de Poel I (2012) Engineering and the problem of moral overload. Sci Eng Ethics 18(1):143–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9277-z
Article
Google Scholar
Umbrello S (2020) Meaningful human control over smart home systems: a value sensitive design approach. Humana Mente J Philos Stud 13(37):40–65
Google Scholar
van Wynsberghe A (2013) Designing robots for care: care centered value-sensitive design. Sci Eng Ethics 19(2):407–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9343-6
Article
Google Scholar
Chen Y, Peng H, Grizzle J (2018) Obstacle avoidance for low-speed autonomous vehicles with barrier function. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 26(1):194–206. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2017.2654063
Article
Google Scholar
Kamali M, Dennis LA, McAree O, Fisher M, Veres SM (2017) Formal verification of autonomous vehicle platooning. Sci Comput Program 148:88–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2017.05.006
Article
Google Scholar
van de Poel I (2017) Dealing with moral dilemmas through design. In: van den Hoven J, Miller S, Pogge T (eds) Designing in ethics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 57–77
Chapter
Google Scholar
Abraham H, Lee C, Brady S, Fitzgerald C, Mehler B, Reimer B, Coughlin JF (2017) Autonomous vehicles, trust, and driving alternatives: a survey of consumer preferences. In: Transportation research board 96th annual meeting, Washington, pp 8–12
Yan C, Xu W, Liu J (2016) Can you trust autonomous vehicles: contactless attacks against sensors of self-driving vehicle. DEF CON 24
Prokhorov DV (2018) Mixed autonomous and manual control of autonomous vehicles. Google Patents
Wang C, Gong S, Zhou A, Li T, Peeta S (2018) Cooperative adaptive cruise control for connected autonomous vehicles by factoring communication-related constraints. http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.07232
Denning T, Kohno T, Levy HM (2013) A framework for evaluating security risks associated with technologies used at home. Commun ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2398356.2398377
Article
Google Scholar
Friedman B, Kahn Jr PH (2002) Value sensitive design: theory and methods. Univ Washingt Tech https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2007.08.009
Friedman B, Hendry DG (2019) Value sensitive design: shaping technology with moral imagination. Mit Press, Cambridge
Book
Google Scholar
Umbrello S (2020) Combinatory and complementary practices of values and virtues in design: a reply to Reijers and Gordijn. Filosofia
Czeskis A, Dermendjieva I, Yapit H, Borning A, Friedman B, Gill B, Kohno T (2010) Parenting from the pocket: value tensions and technical directions for secure and private parent-teen mobile safety. In: Proceedings of the sixth symposium on usable privacy and security, p 15
Yoo D (2017) Stakeholder tokens: a constructive method for value sensitive design stakeholder analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM conference companion publication on designing interactive systems, pp 280–284
Friedman B, Hendry DG (2012) The envisioning cards: a toolkit for catalyzing humanistic and technical imaginations. In: Proceedings of the 30th international conference on human factors in computing systems—CHI ’12, pp 1145–1148. https://doi.org/10.1145/2207676.2208562
Winner L (2003) Do artifacts have politics? Technol Futur 109(1):148–164. https://doi.org/10.2307/20024652
Article
Google Scholar
Pinch T, Bijker WE (1987) The social construction of facts and artifacts. In: Bijker W E, Hughes TP, Pinch T (eds) The Social construction of technological systems : new directions in the sociology and history of technology, MIT Press, p 405
Borning A, Friedman B, Davis J, Lin P (2005) Informing public deliberation: value sensitive design of indicators for a large-scale urban simulation. In: ECSCW 2005, Springer, pp 449–468
Kahn PH Jr, Friedman B, Freier N, Severson R (2003) Coding manual for children’s interactions with AIBO, the robotic dog-the preschool study. Univ Washingt CSE Tech Rep 03–04:3
Google Scholar
Woelfer JP, Hendry DG (2009) Stabilizing homeless young people with information and place. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 60(11):2300–2312
Article
Google Scholar
van de Poel I (2013) Translating values into design requirements. In: Michelfelder DP, McCarthy N, Goldberg DE (eds) Philosophy and engineering: reflections on practice, principles and process. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7762-0_20
Chapter
Google Scholar
Mortier HH, Henderson T, McAuely D, Crowcroft J (2014) Human-data interaction: the human face of the data-driven society. Soc Sci Res Netw
Johri A, Nair S (2011) The role of design values in information system development for human benefit. Inf Technol People 24(3):281–302. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593841111158383
Article
Google Scholar
Vermaas PE, Hekkert P, Manders-Huits N, Tromp N (2014) Design methods in design for values. In: van den Hoven J, Vermaas PE, van de Poel I (eds) Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: sources, theory, values and application domains. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6994-6_10-1
Chapter
Google Scholar
Mecacci G, de Sio FS (2019) Meaningful human control as reason-responsiveness: the case of dual-mode vehicles. Ethics Inf Technol:1–13
Ghani R (2019) you say you want transparency and interpretability? https://dssg.uchicago.edu/2016/04/27/you-say-you-want-transparency-and-interpretability/. Accessed 13 Feb 2019
Roco MC (2008) Possibilities for global governance of converging technologies. J Nanoparticle Res 10(1):11–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-007-9269-8
Article
Google Scholar
Boscoe B (2019) Creating transparency in algorithmic processes. Delphi Interdiscip Rev Emerg Technol 2 (1)
Wooldridge M (2002) An introduction to multiagent systems, John Wiley & Sons
Fisher M, Dennis L, Webster M (2013) Verifying autonomous systems. Commun ACM 56(9):84–93
Article
Google Scholar
Rao AS, Georgeff MP (1992) An abstract architecture for rational agents. In: 3rd international conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning, pp 439–449
Cointe N, Bonnet G, Boissier O (2016) Multi-agent based ethical asset management. In: CEUR workshop proceedings, pp 52–57
Caillou P, Gaudou B, Grignard A, Truong CQ, Taillandier PA (2017) Simple-to-use BDI architecture for agent-based modeling and simulation. In: Advances in social simulation 2015, Springer, pp 15–28
Lee S, Son Y-J (2008) Integrated human decision making model under belief-desire-intention framework for crowd simulation. In: Simulation conference, 2008. WSC 2008. Winter; IEEE, pp 886–894
Dennis LA, Fisher M, Lincoln NK, Lisitsa A, Veres SM (2016) Practical verification of decision-making in agent-based autonomous systems. Autom Softw Eng 23(3):305–359
Article
Google Scholar
Kamali M, Linker S, Fisher M (2018) Modular verification of vehicle platooning with respect to decisions, space and time. http://arxiv.org/abs/1804.06647
Hendrickson CS, Van Nieuwstadt MJ (2018) System and method for platooning vehicles. Google Patents
Calvert SC, Mecacci G, Heikoop DD, de Sio FS (2018) Full platoon control in truck platooning: a meaningful human control perspective. In: 2018 21st international conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC); IEEE, pp 3320–3326
Johnson AM, Axinn S (2013) The morality of autonomous robots. J Mil Ethics 12(2):129–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2013.818399
Article
Google Scholar
Klincewicz M (2015) Autonomous weapons systems, the frame problem and computer security. J Mil Ethics 14(2):162–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2015.1069013
Article
Google Scholar
Umbrello S, Torres P, De Bellis AF (2020) The future of war: Could lethal autonomous weapons make conflict more ethical? AI Soc 35(1):273–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-019-00879-x
Article
Google Scholar
Mordatch I, Abbeel P (2018) Emergence of grounded compositional language in multi-agent populations. In: Thirty-second AAAI conference on artificial intelligence
Tampuu A, Matiisen T, Kodelja D, Kuzovkin I, Korjus K, Aru J, Aru J, Vicente R (2017) Multiagent cooperation and competition with deep reinforcement learning. PLoS ONE 12(4):e0172395
Article
Google Scholar
Mermet B, Simon G (2016) Formal verification of ethical properties in multiagent systems. In: CEUR workshop proceedings. pp 26–31
Bau D, Zhou B, Khosla A, Oliva A, Torralba A (2017) Network dissection: quantifying interpretability of deep visual representations. http://arxiv.org/abs/1704.05796
Kim B, Wattenberg M, Gilmer J, Cai C, Wexler J, Viegas F (2018) Interpretability beyond feature attribution: quantitative testing with concept activation vectors (Tcav). In: International conference on machine learning, pp 2673–2682