Social Sciences 분야 : Robots; Artificial intelligence; Lethal autonomous

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) should reduce traffic accidents, but they will sometimes have to choose between two evils, such as running over pedestrians or sacrificing themselves and their passenger to save the pedestrians. Defining the algorithms that will help AVs make these moral decisions is a formidable challenge. We found that participants in six Amazon Mechanical Turk studies approved of utilitarian AVs (that is, AVs that sacrifice their passengers for the greater good) and would like others to buy them, but they would themselves prefer to ride in AVs that protect their passengers at all costs. The study participants disapprove of enforcing utilitarian regulations for AVs and would be less willing to buy such an AV. Accordingly, regulating for utilitarian algorithms may paradoxically increase casualties by postponing the adoption of a safer technology.

In information societies, operations, decisions and choices previously left to humans are increasingly delegated to algorithms, which may advise, if not decide, about how data should be interpreted and what actions should be taken as a result. More and more often, algorithms mediate social processes, business transactions, governmental decisions, and how we perceive, understand, and interact among ourselves and with the environment. Gaps between the design and operation of algorithms and our understanding of their ethical implications can have severe consequences affecting individuals as well as groups and whole societies. This paper makes three contributions to clarify the ethical importance of algorithmic mediation. It provides a prescriptive map to organise the debate. It reviews the current discussion of ethical aspects of algorithms. And it assesses the available literature in order to identify areas requiring further work to develop the ethics of algorithms. © The Author(s) 2016.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a general term that implies the use of a computer to model intelligent behavior with minimal human intervention. AI is generally accepted as having started with the invention of robots. The term derives from the Czech word robota, meaning biosynthetic machines used as forced labor. In this field, Leonardo Da Vinci's lasting heritage is today's burgeoning use of robotic-assisted surgery, named after him, for complex urologic and gynecologic procedures. Da Vinci's sketchbooks of robots helped set the stage for this innovation. AI, described as the science and engineering of making intelligent machines, was officially born in 1956. The term is applicable to a broad range of items in medicine such as robotics, medical diagnosis, medical statistics, and human biology—up to and including today's “omics”. AI in medicine, which is the focus of this review, has two main branches: virtual and physical. The virtual branch includes informatics approaches from deep learning information management to control of health management systems, including electronic health records, and active guidance of physicians in their treatment decisions. The physical branch is best represented by robots used to assist the elderly patient or the attending surgeon. Also embodied in this branch are targeted nanorobots, a unique new drug delivery system. The societal and ethical complexities of these applications require further reflection, proof of their medical utility, economic value, and development of interdisciplinary strategies for their wider application. © 2017

With the rapid development of artificial intelligence have come concerns about how machines will make moral decisions, and the major challenge of quantifying societal expectations about the ethical principles that should guide machine behaviour. To address this challenge, we deployed the Moral Machine, an online experimental platform designed to explore the moral dilemmas faced by autonomous vehicles. This platform gathered 40 million decisions in ten languages from millions of people in 233 countries and territories. Here we describe the results of this experiment. First, we summarize global moral preferences. Second, we document individual variations in preferences, based on respondents’ demographics. Third, we report cross-cultural ethical variation, and uncover three major clusters of countries. Fourth, we show that these differences correlate with modern institutions and deep cultural traits. We discuss how these preferences can contribute to developing global, socially acceptable principles for machine ethics. All data used in this article are publicly available. © 2018, Springer Nature Limited.

We need to consider the ethical challenges inherent in implementing machine learning in health care if its benefits are to be realized. Some of these challenges are straightforward, whereas others have less obvious risks but raise broader ethical concerns.