人类参与自主决策系统。从航空、社会护理和道路车辆三个案例研究中汲取的经验教训

IF 2.3 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Frontiers in Political Science Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI:10.3389/fpos.2023.1238461
P. Salvini, T. Reinmund, Benjamin Hardin, Keri Grieman, C. Ten Holter, Aaron Johnson, Lars Kunze, Alan Winfield, Marina Jirotka
{"title":"人类参与自主决策系统。从航空、社会护理和道路车辆三个案例研究中汲取的经验教训","authors":"P. Salvini, T. Reinmund, Benjamin Hardin, Keri Grieman, C. Ten Holter, Aaron Johnson, Lars Kunze, Alan Winfield, Marina Jirotka","doi":"10.3389/fpos.2023.1238461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper draws on three case studies to examine some of the challenges and tensions involved in the use of Autonomous Decision-Making Systems (ADMS). In particular, the paper highlights: (i) challenges around the shifting “locale” of the decision, and the associated consequences for stakeholders; (ii) potential implications for stakeholders from regulation such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR); (iii) the different values that stakeholder groups bring to the “decision” question; (iv) how complex pre-existing webs of stakeholders and decision-making authorities may be disrupted or disempowered by the use of an automated system and the lack of evaluation of possible consequences; (v) how ADMS for non-technical users can lead to circumvention of the boundaries of intended system use. We illustrate these challenges through case studies in three domains: adult social care, aviation, and vehicle driver monitoring systems. The paper closes with recommendations for both practice and policy in the deployment of ADMS.","PeriodicalId":34431,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Political Science","volume":"125 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human involvement in autonomous decision-making systems. Lessons learned from three case studies in aviation, social care and road vehicles\",\"authors\":\"P. Salvini, T. Reinmund, Benjamin Hardin, Keri Grieman, C. Ten Holter, Aaron Johnson, Lars Kunze, Alan Winfield, Marina Jirotka\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fpos.2023.1238461\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper draws on three case studies to examine some of the challenges and tensions involved in the use of Autonomous Decision-Making Systems (ADMS). In particular, the paper highlights: (i) challenges around the shifting “locale” of the decision, and the associated consequences for stakeholders; (ii) potential implications for stakeholders from regulation such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR); (iii) the different values that stakeholder groups bring to the “decision” question; (iv) how complex pre-existing webs of stakeholders and decision-making authorities may be disrupted or disempowered by the use of an automated system and the lack of evaluation of possible consequences; (v) how ADMS for non-technical users can lead to circumvention of the boundaries of intended system use. We illustrate these challenges through case studies in three domains: adult social care, aviation, and vehicle driver monitoring systems. The paper closes with recommendations for both practice and policy in the deployment of ADMS.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Political Science\",\"volume\":\"125 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.1238461\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.1238461","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文通过三个案例研究,探讨了在使用自主决策系统(ADMS)过程中遇到的一些挑战和矛盾。本文特别强调(i) 围绕决策 "地点 "变化的挑战,以及对利益相关者的相关影响;(ii) 《通用数据保护条例》(GDPR)等法规对利益相关者的潜在影响;(iii) 利益相关者群体对 "决策 "问题的不同价值观;(iv) 使用自动化系统以及缺乏对可能后果的评估,会如何扰乱或削弱利益相关者和决策机构之间业已存在的复杂关系网;(v) 非技术用户使用自主决策系统会如何导致规避预期系统使用的界限。我们通过三个领域的案例研究来说明这些挑战:成人社会护理、航空和车辆驾驶员监控系统。最后,本文还提出了在 ADMS 部署方面的实践和政策建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Human involvement in autonomous decision-making systems. Lessons learned from three case studies in aviation, social care and road vehicles
This paper draws on three case studies to examine some of the challenges and tensions involved in the use of Autonomous Decision-Making Systems (ADMS). In particular, the paper highlights: (i) challenges around the shifting “locale” of the decision, and the associated consequences for stakeholders; (ii) potential implications for stakeholders from regulation such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR); (iii) the different values that stakeholder groups bring to the “decision” question; (iv) how complex pre-existing webs of stakeholders and decision-making authorities may be disrupted or disempowered by the use of an automated system and the lack of evaluation of possible consequences; (v) how ADMS for non-technical users can lead to circumvention of the boundaries of intended system use. We illustrate these challenges through case studies in three domains: adult social care, aviation, and vehicle driver monitoring systems. The paper closes with recommendations for both practice and policy in the deployment of ADMS.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Political Science
Frontiers in Political Science Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
135
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Human involvement in autonomous decision-making systems. Lessons learned from three case studies in aviation, social care and road vehicles Deciphering the maritime diplomatic properties of Malaysia's oil and gas explorations in the South China Sea Dimensions of cultural sustainability—Local adaptation, adaptive capacity and social resilience Neurorights as reconceptualized human rights Interactions among national and supranational identities: mobilizing the independence movement in Scotland
×
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