Ethical Decision Making in Robots: Autonomy, Trust and Responsibility

Autonomy Trust and Responsibility
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9979)

Abstract

Autonomous robots such as self-driving cars are already able to make decisions that have ethical consequences. As such machines make increasingly complex and important decisions, we will need to know that their decisions are trustworthy and ethically justified. Hence we will need them to be able to explain the reasons for these decisions: ethical decision-making requires that decisions be explainable with reasons. We argue that for people to trust autonomous robots we need to know which ethical principles they are applying and that their application is deterministic and predictable. If a robot is a self-improving, self-learning type of robot whose choices and decisions are based on past experience, which decision it makes in any given situation may not be entirely predictable ahead of time or explainable after the fact. This combination of non-predictability and autonomy may confer a greater degree of responsibility to the machine but it also makes them harder to trust.

Keywords

Robot ethics Autonomy Trust Responsibility 

References

  1. 1.
    Alaieri, F., Vellino, A.: The Ethical Characteristics of Autonomous Robots. We Robot Poster, April 2016. http://hdl.handle.net/10393/34809
  2. 2.
    Allen, C., Smit, I., Wallach, W.: Artificial morality: top-down, bottom-up, and hybrid approaches. Ethics Inf. Technol. 7(3), 149–155 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allen, C., Wallach, W., Smit, I.: Why machine ethics? IEEE Intell. Syst. 21(4), 12–17 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anderson, M., Anderson, S.L.: Machine ethics: creating an ethical intelligent agent. AI Mag. 28(4), 15–26 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Asaro, P.: Robots and responsibility from a legal perspective. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Rome, Italy (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Asaro, P.: What should we want from a robot ethic? Int. Rev. Inform. Ethics 6, 9–16 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bass, D.: Clippy’s back: the future of Microsoft is Chatbots. Bloomberg Businessweek, March 2016. http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-microsoft-future-ai-chatbots/
  8. 8.
    Beer, J.M., Fisk, A.D.: Toward a framework for levels of robot autonomy in human-robot interaction. J. Hum.-Robot Interac. 3(2), 74–99 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Colombo, M., Hartmann, S.: Bayesian cognitive science, unification, and explanation. Br. J. Philos. Sci., axv036 (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crabb, P.B., Stern, S.E.: Technology traps. In: Luppicini, R. (ed.) Ethical Impact of Technological Advancements and Applications in Society, pp. 39–46. IGI Global, April 2012Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C.J., et al.: Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature 529(7587), 484–489 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dodig-Crnkovic, G., Persson, D.: Sharing moral responsibility with robots: a pragmatic approach. In: Tenth Scandinavian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, SCAI 2008, pp. 165–168 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gert, B.: Morality: Its Nature and Justification. Oxford University Press, USA (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hellström, T.: On the moral responsibility of military robots. Ethics Inf. Technol. 15(2), 99–107 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hew, P.C.: Artificial moral agents are infeasible with foreseeable technologies. Ethics Inform. Technol. 16(3), 197–206 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jarvik, M.: How to understand moral responsibility? TRAMES: J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 7(3), 147–163 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson, D.G.: Computer systems: moral entities but not moral agents. Ethics Inf. Technol. 8(4), 195–204 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johnson, D.G.: Technology with no human responsibility? J. Bus. Ethics 127(4), 707–715 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kuflik, A.: Computers in control: rational transfer of authority or irresponsible abdication of autonomy? Ethics Inf. Technol. 1(3), 173–184 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lomas, M., Chevalier, R., Vincent Cross II, E., Garrett, R.C., Hoare, J., Kopack, M.: Explaining robot actions. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 187–188. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Malle, B.F.: Integrating robot ethics and machine morality: the study and design of moral competence in robots. Ethics Inf. Technol. 18(70), 1–14 (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Miller, K.W.: Moral responsibility for computing artifacts: “The Rules". IT Prof. 13(3), 57–59 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moyer, C.: How Google’s AlphaGo Beat a Go World Champion. The Atlantic, March 2016. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/03/the-invisible-opponent/475611/
  24. 24.
    Noorman, M., Johnson, D.G.: Negotiating autonomy and responsibility in military robots. Ethics Inf. Technol. 16(1), 51–62 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Royakkers, L.: A literature review on new robotics: automation from love to war. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7(5), 1–22 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Scheutz, M., Malle, B.F.: think and do the right thinga plea for morally competent autonomous robots. In: 2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering, pp. 1–4. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stahl, B.C.: Responsible computers? a case for ascribing quasi-responsibility to computers independent of personhood or agency. Ethics Inf. Technol. 8(4), 205–213 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tzafestas, S.G.: Roboethics. A Navigating Overview, vol. 79. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wallach, W.: A Dangerous Master. How to Keep Technology from Slipping Beyond Our Control. Basic Books, New York (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information StudiesUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Electronic Business TechnologiesUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Management Information SystemsQassim UniversityBuraydahSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations