A principles‐based ethics assurance argument pattern for AI and autonomous systems

AI and Ethics 4:593-616 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An assurance case is a structured argument, typically produced by safety engineers, to communicate confidence that a critical or complex system, such as an aircraft, will be acceptably safe within its intended context. Assurance cases often inform third party approval of a system. One emerging proposition within the trustworthy AI and autonomous systems (AI/AS) research community is to use assurance cases to instil justified confidence that specific AI/AS will be ethically acceptable when operational in well-defined contexts. This paper substantially develops the proposition and makes it concrete. It brings together the assurance case methodology with a set of ethical principles to structure a principles-based ethics assurance argument pattern. The principles are justice, beneficence, non-maleficence, and respect for human autonomy, with the principle of transparency playing a supporting role. The argument pattern—shortened to the acronym PRAISE—is described. The objective of the proposed PRAISE argument pattern is to provide a reusable template for individual ethics assurance cases, by which engineers, developers, operators, or regulators could justify, communicate, or challenge a claim about the overall ethical acceptability of the use of a specific AI/AS in a given socio-technical context. We apply the pattern to the hypothetical use case of an autonomous ‘robo-taxi’ service in a city centre.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,813

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Autonomous Weapons and Just War Theory.Mansi Rathour - 2023 - International Philosophical Quarterly 63 (1):57-70.
Challenges to engineering moral reasoners : time and context.Michal Klincewicz - 2017 - In Patrick Lin, Keith Abney & Ryan Jenkins (eds.), Robot Ethics 2.0: From Autonomous Cars to Artificial Intelligence. Oxford University Press. pp. 244-259.
Theoretical foundations for the responsibility of autonomous agents.Jaap Hage - 2017 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 25 (3):255-271.
Trust and resilient autonomous driving systems.Adam Henschke - 2020 - Ethics and Information Technology 22 (1):81-92.
Towards broadening the perspective on lethal autonomous weapon systems ethics and regulations.Diego Andres Salcedo, Bianca Ximenes & Geber Ramalho - 2020 - In Diego Andres Salcedo, Bianca Ximenes & Geber Ramalho (eds.), Rio Seminar on Autonomous Weapons Systems. Brasília: Alexandre de Gusmão Foundation. pp. 133-158.
Mind the Gap: Autonomous Systems, the Responsibility Gap, and Moral Entanglement.Trystan S. Goetze - 2022 - Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ’22).

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-05-16

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Marten H. L. Kaas
Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references