Epistemic Reasoning in Computational Machine Ethics

被引:1
|
作者
Limarga, Raynaldio [1 ]
Song, Yang [1 ]
Pagnucco, Maurice [1 ]
Rajaratnam, David [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ New South Wales, Sch Comp Sci & Engn, Sydney, NSW, Australia
关键词
Machine Ethics; Game Theory; Epistemic Reasoning;
D O I
10.1007/978-981-99-8391-9_7
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:82 / 94
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Research ethics and epistemic oppression
    Ackerly, Brooke A.
    Friedman, Elisabeth Jay
    Menon, Krishna
    Zalewski, Marysia
    INTERNATIONAL FEMINIST JOURNAL OF POLITICS, 2020, 22 (03) : 309 - 311
  • [32] The Activity of Reasoning: How Reasoning Can Constitute Epistemic Agency
    Jenkins, David
    PACIFIC PHILOSOPHICAL QUARTERLY, 2021, 102 (03) : 413 - 428
  • [33] Combining sceptical epistemic reasoning with. credulous practical reasoning
    Prakken, Henry
    COMPUTATIONAL MODELS OF ARGUMENT, 2006, 144 : 311 - 322
  • [34] An epistemic modal norm of practical reasoning
    Henning, Tim
    SYNTHESE, 2021, 199 (3-4) : 6665 - 6686
  • [35] Taming the Complexity of Temporal Epistemic Reasoning
    Dixon, Clare
    Fisher, Michael
    Konev, Boris
    FRONTIERS OF COMBINING SYSTEMS, PROCEEDINGS, 2009, 5749 : 198 - 213
  • [36] THE SOCIAL VALUE OF REASONING IN EPISTEMIC JUSTIFICATION
    Nagel, Jennifer
    EPISTEME-A JOURNAL OF INDIVIDUAL AND SOCIAL EPISTEMOLOGY, 2015, 12 (02): : 297 - 308
  • [37] Epistemic Contrastivism, Knowledge and Practical Reasoning
    Peter Baumann
    Erkenntnis, 2016, 81 : 59 - 68
  • [38] Unifying Pedagogical Reasoning and Epistemic Trust
    Eaves, Baxter S., Jr.
    Shafto, Patrick
    RATIONAL CONSTRUCTIVISM IN COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT, 2012, 43 : 295 - 319
  • [39] Epistemic akrasia and the fallibility of critical reasoning
    Cristina Borgoni
    Yannig Luthra
    Philosophical Studies, 2017, 174 : 877 - 886
  • [40] DECKT: Epistemic Reasoning for Ambient Intelligence
    Patkos, Theodore
    Plexousakis, Dimitris
    ERCIM NEWS, 2011, (84): : 30 - 31