Ethical Decision-Making for Self-Driving Vehicles: A Proposed Model & List of Value-Laden Terms that Warrant (Technical) Specification.

IF 2.7 2区 哲学 Q1 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Science and Engineering Ethics Pub Date : 2024-10-10 DOI:10.1007/s11948-024-00513-0
Franziska Poszler, Maximilian Geisslinger, Christoph Lütge
{"title":"Ethical Decision-Making for Self-Driving Vehicles: A Proposed Model & List of Value-Laden Terms that Warrant (Technical) Specification.","authors":"Franziska Poszler, Maximilian Geisslinger, Christoph Lütge","doi":"10.1007/s11948-024-00513-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Self-driving vehicles (SDVs) will need to make decisions that carry ethical dimensions and are of normative significance. For example, by choosing a specific trajectory, they determine how risks are distributed among traffic participants. Accordingly, policymakers, standardization organizations and scholars have conceptualized what (shall) constitute(s) ethical decision-making for SDVs. Eventually, these conceptualizations must be converted into specific system requirements to ensure proper technical implementation. Therefore, this article aims to translate critical requirements recently formulated in scholarly work, existing standards, regulatory drafts and guidelines into an explicit five-step ethical decision model for SDVs during hazardous situations. This model states a precise sequence of steps, indicates the guiding ethical principles that inform each step and points out a list of terms that demand further investigation and technical specification. By integrating ethical, legal and engineering considerations, we aim to contribute to the scholarly debate on computational ethics (particularly in autonomous driving) while offering practitioners in the automotive sector a decision-making process for SDVs that is technically viable, legally permissible, ethically grounded and adaptable to societal values. In the future, assessing the actual impact, effectiveness and admissibility of implementing the here sketched theories, terms and the overall decision process requires an empirical evaluation and testing of the overall decision-making model.</p>","PeriodicalId":49564,"journal":{"name":"Science and Engineering Ethics","volume":"30 5","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11466986/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Engineering Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-024-00513-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Self-driving vehicles (SDVs) will need to make decisions that carry ethical dimensions and are of normative significance. For example, by choosing a specific trajectory, they determine how risks are distributed among traffic participants. Accordingly, policymakers, standardization organizations and scholars have conceptualized what (shall) constitute(s) ethical decision-making for SDVs. Eventually, these conceptualizations must be converted into specific system requirements to ensure proper technical implementation. Therefore, this article aims to translate critical requirements recently formulated in scholarly work, existing standards, regulatory drafts and guidelines into an explicit five-step ethical decision model for SDVs during hazardous situations. This model states a precise sequence of steps, indicates the guiding ethical principles that inform each step and points out a list of terms that demand further investigation and technical specification. By integrating ethical, legal and engineering considerations, we aim to contribute to the scholarly debate on computational ethics (particularly in autonomous driving) while offering practitioners in the automotive sector a decision-making process for SDVs that is technically viable, legally permissible, ethically grounded and adaptable to societal values. In the future, assessing the actual impact, effectiveness and admissibility of implementing the here sketched theories, terms and the overall decision process requires an empirical evaluation and testing of the overall decision-making model.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自动驾驶汽车的道德决策:建议的模型和需要(技术)规范的价值术语清单。
自动驾驶汽车(SDV)需要做出具有道德层面和规范意义的决定。例如,通过选择特定的轨迹,它们决定了风险如何在交通参与者之间分配。因此,政策制定者、标准化组织和学者对什么(应)构成 SDV 的道德决策进行了概念化。最终,这些概念必须转化为具体的系统要求,以确保正确的技术实施。因此,本文旨在将最近在学术著作、现有标准、监管草案和指南中提出的关键要求转化为一个明确的五步伦理决策模型,供特警队员在危险情况下使用。该模型陈述了精确的步骤顺序,指出了指导每个步骤的伦理原则,并指出了需要进一步调查和技术规范的术语清单。通过整合伦理、法律和工程方面的考虑因素,我们旨在为有关计算伦理(尤其是自动驾驶)的学术讨论做出贡献,同时为汽车行业的从业人员提供一个在技术上可行、法律上允许、伦理上有依据并能适应社会价值观的 SDV 决策过程。未来,要评估本文所概述的理论、术语和整个决策过程的实际影响、有效性和可接受性,需要对整个决策模型进行实证评估和测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Science and Engineering Ethics
Science and Engineering Ethics 综合性期刊-工程:综合
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
5.40%
发文量
54
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science and Engineering Ethics is an international multidisciplinary journal dedicated to exploring ethical issues associated with science and engineering, covering professional education, research and practice as well as the effects of technological innovations and research findings on society. While the focus of this journal is on science and engineering, contributions from a broad range of disciplines, including social sciences and humanities, are welcomed. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, ethics of new and emerging technologies, research ethics, computer ethics, energy ethics, animals and human subjects ethics, ethics education in science and engineering, ethics in design, biomedical ethics, values in technology and innovation. We welcome contributions that deal with these issues from an international perspective, particularly from countries that are underrepresented in these discussions.
期刊最新文献
Authorship and Citizen Science: Seven Heuristic Rules. A Confucian Algorithm for Autonomous Vehicles. A Rubik's Cube-Inspired Pedagogical Tool for Teaching and Learning Engineering Ethics. Patient Preferences Concerning Humanoid Features in Healthcare Robots. Responsibility Gaps and Retributive Dispositions: Evidence from the US, Japan and Germany.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1