Ethical Decision Making in Autonomous Vehicles: The AV Ethics Project
The ethics of autonomous vehicles (AV) has received a great amount of attention in recent years, specifically in regard to their decisional policies in accident situations in which human harm is a likely consequence. Starting from the assumption that human harm is unavoidable, many authors have deve...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Science and engineering ethics 2020-12, Vol.26 (6), p.3285-3312 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 3312 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 3285 |
container_title | Science and engineering ethics |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Evans, Katherine de Moura, Nelson Chauvier, Stéphane Chatila, Raja Dogan, Ebru |
description | The ethics of autonomous vehicles (AV) has received a great amount of attention in recent years, specifically in regard to their decisional policies in accident situations in which human harm is a likely consequence. Starting from the assumption that human harm is unavoidable, many authors have developed differing accounts of what morality requires in these situations. In this article, a strategy for AV decision-making is proposed, the Ethical Valence Theory, which paints AV decision-making as a type of claim mitigation: different road users hold different moral claims on the vehicle’s behavior, and the vehicle must mitigate these claims as it makes decisions about its environment. Using the context of autonomous vehicles, the harm produced by an action and the uncertainties connected to it are quantified and accounted for through deliberation, resulting in an ethical implementation coherent with reality. The goal of this approach is not to define how moral theory requires vehicles to behave, but rather to provide a computational approach that is flexible enough to accommodate a number of ‘moral positions’ concerning what morality demands and what road users may expect, offering an evaluation tool for the social acceptability of an autonomous vehicle’s ethical decision making. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11948-020-00272-8 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7755871</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2473394143</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c617t-22b6a99d5fd6546fee4fad72318aa04204a8b8f8de04fdf12652bf63099a33153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc9PFDEUxxuiAUT-AQ-mCRc9jLz-mnY4mGxwFZMlekCuTXem3e0620I7Q-J_b5dBUA6e2vR93vd9-74IvSHwgQDI00xIw1UFFCoAKmml9tAh4ZJUQvD6RbkzwSrGBT1Ar3LeFEgoXu-jA8aAK0bFIZrPh7VvTY8_2dZnHwO-ND99WGEf8GwcYojbOGZ8bQvV23yGr9YWz67xfVvG31Pc2HZ4jV4602d7_HAeoR-f51fnF9Xi25ev57NF1dZEDhWly9o0TSdcVxeHzlruTCcpI8oY4BS4UUvlVGeBu84RWgu6dDWDpjGMEcGO0MdJ92Zcbm3X2jAk0-ub5Lcm_dLReP1vJfi1XsU7LaUQSpIi8H4SWD9ru5gt9O4NaCMFSHK3Y989DEvxdrR50FufW9v3JtiyE025gFoyRlVBT56hmzimUFZRqII0nHBWKDpRbYo5J-seHRDQu0T1lGgxAfo-Ub2Tfvv3lx9b_kRYADYBuZTCyqan2f-R_Q3P16nV</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2473394143</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Ethical Decision Making in Autonomous Vehicles: The AV Ethics Project</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Evans, Katherine ; de Moura, Nelson ; Chauvier, Stéphane ; Chatila, Raja ; Dogan, Ebru</creator><creatorcontrib>Evans, Katherine ; de Moura, Nelson ; Chauvier, Stéphane ; Chatila, Raja ; Dogan, Ebru</creatorcontrib><description>The ethics of autonomous vehicles (AV) has received a great amount of attention in recent years, specifically in regard to their decisional policies in accident situations in which human harm is a likely consequence. Starting from the assumption that human harm is unavoidable, many authors have developed differing accounts of what morality requires in these situations. In this article, a strategy for AV decision-making is proposed, the Ethical Valence Theory, which paints AV decision-making as a type of claim mitigation: different road users hold different moral claims on the vehicle’s behavior, and the vehicle must mitigate these claims as it makes decisions about its environment. Using the context of autonomous vehicles, the harm produced by an action and the uncertainties connected to it are quantified and accounted for through deliberation, resulting in an ethical implementation coherent with reality. The goal of this approach is not to define how moral theory requires vehicles to behave, but rather to provide a computational approach that is flexible enough to accommodate a number of ‘moral positions’ concerning what morality demands and what road users may expect, offering an evaluation tool for the social acceptability of an autonomous vehicle’s ethical decision making.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1353-3452</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-5546</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11948-020-00272-8</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33048325</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Artificial Intelligence ; Autonomous vehicles ; Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering ; Computer applications ; Computer Science ; Computers and Society ; Decision Making ; Decision theory ; Education ; Engineering ; Ethical standards ; Ethical Theory ; Ethics ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Humans ; Medicine/Public Health ; Morality ; Morals ; Original Research/Scholarship ; Philosophy ; Philosophy of Science ; Uncertainty ; Vehicles</subject><ispartof>Science and engineering ethics, 2020-12, Vol.26 (6), p.3285-3312</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2020. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Open licence - etalab</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c617t-22b6a99d5fd6546fee4fad72318aa04204a8b8f8de04fdf12652bf63099a33153</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c617t-22b6a99d5fd6546fee4fad72318aa04204a8b8f8de04fdf12652bf63099a33153</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1266-941X ; 0000-0001-7822-0634 ; 0000-0002-1589-4807</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11948-020-00272-8$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11948-020-00272-8$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27915,27916,41479,42548,51310</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33048325$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.sorbonne-universite.fr/hal-02975071$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Evans, Katherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Moura, Nelson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chauvier, Stéphane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chatila, Raja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dogan, Ebru</creatorcontrib><title>Ethical Decision Making in Autonomous Vehicles: The AV Ethics Project</title><title>Science and engineering ethics</title><addtitle>Sci Eng Ethics</addtitle><addtitle>Sci Eng Ethics</addtitle><description>The ethics of autonomous vehicles (AV) has received a great amount of attention in recent years, specifically in regard to their decisional policies in accident situations in which human harm is a likely consequence. Starting from the assumption that human harm is unavoidable, many authors have developed differing accounts of what morality requires in these situations. In this article, a strategy for AV decision-making is proposed, the Ethical Valence Theory, which paints AV decision-making as a type of claim mitigation: different road users hold different moral claims on the vehicle’s behavior, and the vehicle must mitigate these claims as it makes decisions about its environment. Using the context of autonomous vehicles, the harm produced by an action and the uncertainties connected to it are quantified and accounted for through deliberation, resulting in an ethical implementation coherent with reality. The goal of this approach is not to define how moral theory requires vehicles to behave, but rather to provide a computational approach that is flexible enough to accommodate a number of ‘moral positions’ concerning what morality demands and what road users may expect, offering an evaluation tool for the social acceptability of an autonomous vehicle’s ethical decision making.</description><subject>Artificial Intelligence</subject><subject>Autonomous vehicles</subject><subject>Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering</subject><subject>Computer applications</subject><subject>Computer Science</subject><subject>Computers and Society</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Decision theory</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Engineering</subject><subject>Ethical standards</subject><subject>Ethical Theory</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medicine/Public Health</subject><subject>Morality</subject><subject>Morals</subject><subject>Original Research/Scholarship</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Philosophy of Science</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><subject>Vehicles</subject><issn>1353-3452</issn><issn>1471-5546</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc9PFDEUxxuiAUT-AQ-mCRc9jLz-mnY4mGxwFZMlekCuTXem3e0620I7Q-J_b5dBUA6e2vR93vd9-74IvSHwgQDI00xIw1UFFCoAKmml9tAh4ZJUQvD6RbkzwSrGBT1Ar3LeFEgoXu-jA8aAK0bFIZrPh7VvTY8_2dZnHwO-ND99WGEf8GwcYojbOGZ8bQvV23yGr9YWz67xfVvG31Pc2HZ4jV4602d7_HAeoR-f51fnF9Xi25ev57NF1dZEDhWly9o0TSdcVxeHzlruTCcpI8oY4BS4UUvlVGeBu84RWgu6dDWDpjGMEcGO0MdJ92Zcbm3X2jAk0-ub5Lcm_dLReP1vJfi1XsU7LaUQSpIi8H4SWD9ru5gt9O4NaCMFSHK3Y989DEvxdrR50FufW9v3JtiyE025gFoyRlVBT56hmzimUFZRqII0nHBWKDpRbYo5J-seHRDQu0T1lGgxAfo-Ub2Tfvv3lx9b_kRYADYBuZTCyqan2f-R_Q3P16nV</recordid><startdate>20201201</startdate><enddate>20201201</enddate><creator>Evans, Katherine</creator><creator>de Moura, Nelson</creator><creator>Chauvier, Stéphane</creator><creator>Chatila, Raja</creator><creator>Dogan, Ebru</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><general>Springer Verlag (Germany)</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C18</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>BXJBU</scope><scope>IHQJB</scope><scope>VOOES</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1266-941X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7822-0634</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1589-4807</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20201201</creationdate><title>Ethical Decision Making in Autonomous Vehicles: The AV Ethics Project</title><author>Evans, Katherine ; de Moura, Nelson ; Chauvier, Stéphane ; Chatila, Raja ; Dogan, Ebru</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c617t-22b6a99d5fd6546fee4fad72318aa04204a8b8f8de04fdf12652bf63099a33153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Artificial Intelligence</topic><topic>Autonomous vehicles</topic><topic>Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering</topic><topic>Computer applications</topic><topic>Computer Science</topic><topic>Computers and Society</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Decision theory</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Engineering</topic><topic>Ethical standards</topic><topic>Ethical Theory</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medicine/Public Health</topic><topic>Morality</topic><topic>Morals</topic><topic>Original Research/Scholarship</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Philosophy of Science</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><topic>Vehicles</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Evans, Katherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Moura, Nelson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chauvier, Stéphane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chatila, Raja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dogan, Ebru</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Humanities Index</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société (Open Access)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL) (Open Access)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Science and engineering ethics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Evans, Katherine</au><au>de Moura, Nelson</au><au>Chauvier, Stéphane</au><au>Chatila, Raja</au><au>Dogan, Ebru</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Ethical Decision Making in Autonomous Vehicles: The AV Ethics Project</atitle><jtitle>Science and engineering ethics</jtitle><stitle>Sci Eng Ethics</stitle><addtitle>Sci Eng Ethics</addtitle><date>2020-12-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>3285</spage><epage>3312</epage><pages>3285-3312</pages><issn>1353-3452</issn><eissn>1471-5546</eissn><abstract>The ethics of autonomous vehicles (AV) has received a great amount of attention in recent years, specifically in regard to their decisional policies in accident situations in which human harm is a likely consequence. Starting from the assumption that human harm is unavoidable, many authors have developed differing accounts of what morality requires in these situations. In this article, a strategy for AV decision-making is proposed, the Ethical Valence Theory, which paints AV decision-making as a type of claim mitigation: different road users hold different moral claims on the vehicle’s behavior, and the vehicle must mitigate these claims as it makes decisions about its environment. Using the context of autonomous vehicles, the harm produced by an action and the uncertainties connected to it are quantified and accounted for through deliberation, resulting in an ethical implementation coherent with reality. The goal of this approach is not to define how moral theory requires vehicles to behave, but rather to provide a computational approach that is flexible enough to accommodate a number of ‘moral positions’ concerning what morality demands and what road users may expect, offering an evaluation tool for the social acceptability of an autonomous vehicle’s ethical decision making.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>33048325</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11948-020-00272-8</doi><tpages>28</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1266-941X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7822-0634</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1589-4807</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1353-3452 |
ispartof | Science and engineering ethics, 2020-12, Vol.26 (6), p.3285-3312 |
issn | 1353-3452 1471-5546 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7755871 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Artificial Intelligence Autonomous vehicles Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering Computer applications Computer Science Computers and Society Decision Making Decision theory Education Engineering Ethical standards Ethical Theory Ethics Humanities and Social Sciences Humans Medicine/Public Health Morality Morals Original Research/Scholarship Philosophy Philosophy of Science Uncertainty Vehicles |
title | Ethical Decision Making in Autonomous Vehicles: The AV Ethics Project |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T21%3A17%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Ethical%20Decision%20Making%20in%20Autonomous%20Vehicles:%20The%20AV%20Ethics%20Project&rft.jtitle=Science%20and%20engineering%20ethics&rft.au=Evans,%20Katherine&rft.date=2020-12-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=3285&rft.epage=3312&rft.pages=3285-3312&rft.issn=1353-3452&rft.eissn=1471-5546&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11948-020-00272-8&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2473394143%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2473394143&rft_id=info:pmid/33048325&rfr_iscdi=true |