Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Machine Ethics and Automated Vehicles

  • Chapter
Book cover Road Vehicle Automation

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mobility ((LNMOB))

Abstract

Road vehicle travel at a reasonable speed involves some risk, even when using computer-controlled driving with failure-free hardware and perfect sensing. A fully-automated vehicle must continuously decide how to allocate this risk without a human driver’s oversight. These are ethical decisions, particularly in instances where an automated vehicle cannot avoid crashing. In this chapter, I introduce the concept of moral behavior for an automated vehicle, argue the need for research in this area through responses to anticipated critiques, and discuss relevant applications from machine ethics and moral modeling research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Fambro DB, Fitzpatrick K, Koppa RJ (1997) Determination of stopping sight distances. Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C, NCHRP 400

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fraichard T, Kuffner JJ (2012) Guaranteeing motion safety for robots. Auton Robots 32(3):173–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fraichard T, Asama H (2004) Inevitable collision states—a step towards safer robots? Adv Robot 18(10):1001–1024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Benenson R, Fraichard T, Parent M (2008) Achievable safety of driverless ground vehicles. In: 10th international conference on control, Automation, Robotics and Vision, ICARCV 2008, pp 515–521

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bautin A, Martinez-Gomez L, Fraichard T (2010) Inevitable collision states: a probabilistic perspective. In: 2010 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), pp 4022–4027

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ferguson DIF, Dolgov DA (2013) Modifying behavior of autonomous vehicle based on predicted behavior of other vehicles. US Patent Application 2,013,026,187,2 Kind Code: A1

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dingus TA, Klauer SG, Neale VL, Petersen A, Lee SE, Sudweeks J, Perez MA, Hankey J, Ramsey D, Gupta S, Bucher C, Doerzaph ZR, Jermeland J, Knipling RR (2006) The 100-car naturalistic driving study, phase II—results of the 100-car field experiment. Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, DOT HS 810 593

    Google Scholar 

  8. Najm WG, Sen B, Smith JD, Campbel BN (2003) Analysis of light vehicle crashes and pre-crash scenarios based on the 2000 general estimates system. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington DC, DOT-VNTSC-NHTSA-02-04

    Google Scholar 

  9. Foot P (1967) The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxf Rev 5:5–15

    Google Scholar 

  10. Templeton B (2013) Enough with the trolley problem, already. Brad Ideas, 10-Oct-2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.ideas.4brad.com/enough-trolley-problem-already. Accessed 11 Oct 2013

  11. Bilger B (2013) Auto correct: has the self-driving car at last arrived? The New Yorker, 25-Nov-2013

    Google Scholar 

  12. John A Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (2008) Vehicle-infrastructure integration (VII) initiative benefit-cost analysis v.2.3 (draft), Federal Highway Administration, May 2008

    Google Scholar 

  13. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2013) Preliminary statement of policy concerning automated vehicles. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington DC, NHTSA 14-13

    Google Scholar 

  14. Llaneras RE, Salinger JA, Green CA (2013) Human factors issues associated with limited ability autonomous driving systems: drivers’ allocation of visual attention to the forward roadway. In: Proceedings of the seventh international driving symposium on human factors in driver assessment, training, and vehicle design, Bolton Landing, New York, pp 92–98

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jamson AH, Merat N, Carsten OMJ, Lai FCH (2013) Behavioural changes in drivers experiencing highly-automated vehicle control in varying traffic conditions. Transp Res Part C: Emerg Technol 30:116–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (2011) A policy on geometric design of highways and streets, 6th ed. AASHTO, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bosch (2009) LRR3: 3rd generation long-range radar sensor. Robert Bosch GmbH, Leonberg, Germany, 292000P03 W-C/SMC2-200906-En. http://www.bosch-automotivetechnology.com/media/db_application/downloads/pdf/safety_1/en_4/lrr3_datenblatt_de_2009.pdf. Accessed 15 Nov 2013

  18. United States Census Bureau (2012) Statistical abstract of the United States. United States Census Bureau, Washington, DC, Table 1107. Vehicles Involved in Crashes by Vehicle Type, Rollover Occurrence, and Crash Severity: 2009

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lin P (2013) The ethics of autonomous cars. The Atlantic, 08-Oct-2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/the-ethics-of-autonomous-cars/280360/. Accessed 09 Oct 2013

  20. Goodall NJ (Forthcoming, 2014) Ethical decision making during automated vehicle crashes. Transp Res Rec: J Transp Res Board

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lin P (2013) The ethics of saving lives with autonomous cars are far murkier than you think. Wired Opinion, 30-Jul-2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/07/the-surprising-ethics-of-robot-cars/. Accessed 30 Jul 2013

  22. Hibbard B (2012) Avoiding unintended AI behaviors. In: Artificial general intelligence: 5th international conference, Oxford, UK, pp 107–116

    Google Scholar 

  23. Beavers AF (2009) Between angels and animals: the question of robot ethics, or is Kantian moral agency desirable? In: Annual meeting of the association of practical and professional ethics, Cincinnati, OH

    Google Scholar 

  24. Powers TM (2006) Prospects for a Kantian machine. IEEE Intell Syst 21(4):46–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tonkens R (2009) A challenge for machine ethics. Mind Mach 19(3):421–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Powers TM (2013) Prospects for a Smithian machine. In: Proceedings of the international association for computing and philosophy, College Park, Maryland

    Google Scholar 

  27. Powers TM (2005) Deontological machine ethics. In: Machine ethics: papers from the AAAI fall symposium, Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bringsjord S, Arkoudas K, Bello P (2006) Toward a general logicist methodology for engineering ethically correct robots. IEEE Intell Syst 21(4):38–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Asimov I (1942) Runaround. Astounding Sci Fiction 29(1):94–103

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hansson SO (2007) Ethics and radiation protection. J Radiol Prot 27(2):147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Anderson M, Anderson SL, Armen C (2005) Towards machine ethics: implementing two action-based ethical theories. In: Proceedings of the AAAI 2005 fall symposium on machine ethics, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ross WD (1930) The right and the good. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rawls J (1999) A theory of justice, rev. ed. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  34. Anderson M, Anderson SL, Armen C (2006) MedEthEx: a prototype medical ethics advisor. In: Proceedings of the 18th conference on innovative applications of artificial intelligence, Boston, Massachusetts, vol 2, pp 1759–1765

    Google Scholar 

  35. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (1979) Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  36. McLaren BM (2006) Computational models of ethical reasoning: challenges, initial steps, and future directions. IEEE Intell Syst 21(4):29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Reed GS, Jones N (2013) Toward modeling and automating ethical decision making: design, implementation, limitations, and responsibilities. Topoi 32(2):237–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Virginia Center for Transportation Innovation and Research, 530 Edgemont Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22903, USA

    Noah J. Goodall

Authors
  1. Noah J. Goodall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noah J. Goodall .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH, Berlin, Germany

    Gereon Meyer

  2. Center for Automotive Research, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    Sven Beiker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Goodall, N.J. (2014). Machine Ethics and Automated Vehicles. In: Meyer, G., Beiker, S. (eds) Road Vehicle Automation. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05990-7_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05990-7_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-05989-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05990-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation