[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to main content

Epistemic Reasoning in Computational Machine Ethics

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
AI 2023: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 14472))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1057 Accesses

Abstract

Recent developments in computational machine ethics have adopted the assumption of a fully observable environment. However, such an assumption is not realistic for the ethical decision-making process. Epistemic reasoning is one approach to deal with a non-fully observable environment and non-determinism. Current approaches to computational machine ethics require careful designs of aggregation functions (strategies). Different strategies to consolidate non-deterministic knowledge will result in different actions determined to be ethically permissible. However, recent studies have not tried to formalise a proper evaluation of these strategies. On the other hand, strategies for a partially observable universe are also studied in the game theory literature, with studies providing axioms, such as Linearity and Symmetry, to evaluate strategies in situations where agents need to interact with the uncertainty of nature. Regardless of the resemblance, strategies in game theory have not been applied to machine ethics. Therefore, in this study, we propose to adopt four game theoretic strategies to three approaches of machine ethics with epistemic reasoning so that machines can navigate complex ethical dilemmas. With our formalisation, we can also evaluate these strategies using the proposed axioms and show that a particular aggregation function is more volatile in a specific situation but more robust in others.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
GBP 19.95
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
GBP 51.99
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
GBP 64.99
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baum, K., Hermanns, H., Speith, T.: Towards a framework combining machine ethics and machine explainability. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.00590 (2019)

  2. Dennis, L., Fisher, M., Slavkovik, M., Webster, M.: Formal verification of ethical choices in autonomous systems. Robot. Auton. Syst. 77, 1–14 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fudenberg, D., Tirole, J.: Game Theory. MIT Press, Cambridge (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hurwicz, L.: The generalized Bayes minimax principle: A criterion for decision making under uncertainty. Cowles Comm. Discuss. Paper Stat 335, 1950 (1951)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kim, R., et al.: A computational model of commonsense moral decision making. In: Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp. 197–203 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lindner, F., Mattmüller, R., Nebel, B.: Evaluation of the moral permissibility of action plans. Artif. Intell. 287, 103350 (2020)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Lourie, N., Le Bras, R., Choi, Y.: Scruples: a corpus of community ethical judgments on 32,000 real-life anecdotes. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, pp. 13470–13479 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mill, J.S.: Utilitarianism. In: Seven Masterpieces of Philosophy, pp. 329–375. Routledge (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Milnor, J.: Games against nature. Game Theory and Related Approaches to Social Behavior. Wiley, Hoboken (1964)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Noothigattu, R., et al.: Teaching AI agents ethical values using reinforcement learning and policy orchestration. IBM J. Res. Dev. 63(4/5), 2–1 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pagnucco, M., Rajaratnam, D., Limarga, R., Nayak, A., Song, Y.: Epistemic reasoning for machine ethics with situation calculus. In: Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp. 814–821 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Perrone, V., Donini, M., Zafar, M.B., Schmucker, R., Kenthapadi, K., Archambeau, C.: Fair Bayesian optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp. 854–863 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pierre-Simon, L.: Théorie analytique des probabilités. Livre II, Chapitre X. De l’espérance morale, Oeuvres de Laplace, ome VII, Imprimerie Royale, pp. 474–488 (1812)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Reiter, R.: The frame problem in the situation calculus: a simple solution (sometimes) and a completeness result for goal regression. Artif. Math. Theory Comput. 3 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations For Specifying and Implementing Dynamical Systems. MIT press, Cambridge (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rodriguez-Soto, M., Lopez-Sanchez, M., Rodriguez-Aguilar, J.A.: Multi-objective reinforcement learning for designing ethical environments. In: IJCAI, pp. 545–551 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Savage, L.J.: The Foundations of Statistics. Courier Corporation (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Scherl, R.B., Levesque, H.J.: The frame problem and knowledge-producing actions. In: AAAI, vol. 93, pp. 689–695 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Scherl, R.B., Levesque, H.J.: Knowledge, action, and the frame problem. Artif. Intell. 144(1–2), 1–39 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Sohrabi, M.K., Azgomi, H.: A survey on the combined use of optimization methods and game theory. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 27(1), 59–80 (2020)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Straffin, P.D.: Game Theory and Strategy, vol. 36. MAA (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Svegliato, J., Nashed, S.B., Zilberstein, S.: Ethically compliant planning in moral autonomous systems. In: IJCAI (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tolmeijer, S., Kneer, M., Sarasua, C., Christen, M., Bernstein, A.: Implementations in machine ethics: a survey. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 53(6), 1–38 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Wald, A.: Statistical decision functions (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wu, Y.H., Lin, S.D.: A low-cost ethics shaping approach for designing reinforcement learning agents. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 32 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raynaldio Limarga .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

1 Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (pdf 282 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Limarga, R., Song, Y., Pagnucco, M., Rajaratnam, D. (2024). Epistemic Reasoning in Computational Machine Ethics. In: Liu, T., Webb, G., Yue, L., Wang, D. (eds) AI 2023: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AI 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 14472. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8391-9_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8391-9_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-8390-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-8391-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics