设计辅助技术的人工智能模拟中的伦理考虑因素

Evin Miser, Orcun Sarioguz
{"title":"设计辅助技术的人工智能模拟中的伦理考虑因素","authors":"Evin Miser, Orcun Sarioguz","doi":"10.60087/jaigs.v4i1.135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Current ethical debates on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare approach AI technology in three primary ways. First, they assess the risks and potential benefits of current AI-enabled products using ethical checklists. Second, they propose ex ante lists of ethical values relevant to the design and development of assistive technologies. Third, they advocate for incorporating moral reasoning into AI's automation processes. These three perspectives dominate the discourse, as evidenced by a brief literature summary. We propose a fourth approach: viewing AI as a methodological tool to aid ethical reflection. This involves an AI simulation concept informed by three elements: 1) stochastic human behavior models based on behavioral data for simulating realistic scenarios, 2) qualitative empirical data on value statements regarding internal policy, and 3) visualization components to illustrate the impact of variable changes. This approach aims to inform an interdisciplinary field about anticipated ethical challenges or trade-offs in specific settings, prompting a re-evaluation of design and implementation plans. This is particularly useful for applications involving complex values and behaviors or limited communication resources, such as dementia care or care for individuals with cognitive impairments. While simulation does not replace ethical reflection, it allows for detailed, context-sensitive analysis during the design process and before implementation.Finally, we discuss the quantitative analysis methods enabled by stochastic simulations and the potential for these simulations to enhance traditional thought experiments and future-oriented technology assessments.","PeriodicalId":517201,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Artificial Intelligence General science (JAIGS) ISSN:3006-4023","volume":"60 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ethical Considerations in AI Simulations for Designing Assistive Technologies\",\"authors\":\"Evin Miser, Orcun Sarioguz\",\"doi\":\"10.60087/jaigs.v4i1.135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Current ethical debates on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare approach AI technology in three primary ways. First, they assess the risks and potential benefits of current AI-enabled products using ethical checklists. Second, they propose ex ante lists of ethical values relevant to the design and development of assistive technologies. Third, they advocate for incorporating moral reasoning into AI's automation processes. These three perspectives dominate the discourse, as evidenced by a brief literature summary. We propose a fourth approach: viewing AI as a methodological tool to aid ethical reflection. This involves an AI simulation concept informed by three elements: 1) stochastic human behavior models based on behavioral data for simulating realistic scenarios, 2) qualitative empirical data on value statements regarding internal policy, and 3) visualization components to illustrate the impact of variable changes. This approach aims to inform an interdisciplinary field about anticipated ethical challenges or trade-offs in specific settings, prompting a re-evaluation of design and implementation plans. This is particularly useful for applications involving complex values and behaviors or limited communication resources, such as dementia care or care for individuals with cognitive impairments. While simulation does not replace ethical reflection, it allows for detailed, context-sensitive analysis during the design process and before implementation.Finally, we discuss the quantitative analysis methods enabled by stochastic simulations and the potential for these simulations to enhance traditional thought experiments and future-oriented technology assessments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":517201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Artificial Intelligence General science (JAIGS) ISSN:3006-4023\",\"volume\":\"60 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Artificial Intelligence General science (JAIGS) ISSN:3006-4023\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.60087/jaigs.v4i1.135\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Artificial Intelligence General science (JAIGS) ISSN:3006-4023","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.60087/jaigs.v4i1.135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前关于在医疗保健领域使用人工智能(AI)的伦理辩论主要从三个方面探讨人工智能技术。首先,他们使用伦理清单评估当前人工智能产品的风险和潜在益处。其次,他们事先提出了与辅助技术的设计和开发相关的伦理价值清单。第三,他们主张将道德推理纳入人工智能的自动化流程。正如简要的文献综述所示,这三种观点在讨论中占主导地位。我们提出了第四种方法:将人工智能视为辅助道德反思的方法论工具。这涉及一个人工智能模拟概念,其中包含三个要素:1) 基于行为数据的随机人类行为模型,用于模拟现实场景;2) 有关内部政策价值声明的定性经验数据;3) 可视化组件,用于说明变量变化的影响。这种方法旨在为跨学科领域提供有关特定环境中预期的伦理挑战或权衡的信息,从而促使对设计和实施计划进行重新评估。这对于涉及复杂价值观和行为或沟通资源有限的应用尤其有用,例如老年痴呆症护理或认知障碍患者护理。最后,我们讨论了随机模拟所带来的定量分析方法,以及这些模拟在加强传统思想实验和面向未来的技术评估方面的潜力。
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
Ethical Considerations in AI Simulations for Designing Assistive Technologies
Current ethical debates on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare approach AI technology in three primary ways. First, they assess the risks and potential benefits of current AI-enabled products using ethical checklists. Second, they propose ex ante lists of ethical values relevant to the design and development of assistive technologies. Third, they advocate for incorporating moral reasoning into AI's automation processes. These three perspectives dominate the discourse, as evidenced by a brief literature summary. We propose a fourth approach: viewing AI as a methodological tool to aid ethical reflection. This involves an AI simulation concept informed by three elements: 1) stochastic human behavior models based on behavioral data for simulating realistic scenarios, 2) qualitative empirical data on value statements regarding internal policy, and 3) visualization components to illustrate the impact of variable changes. This approach aims to inform an interdisciplinary field about anticipated ethical challenges or trade-offs in specific settings, prompting a re-evaluation of design and implementation plans. This is particularly useful for applications involving complex values and behaviors or limited communication resources, such as dementia care or care for individuals with cognitive impairments. While simulation does not replace ethical reflection, it allows for detailed, context-sensitive analysis during the design process and before implementation.Finally, we discuss the quantitative analysis methods enabled by stochastic simulations and the potential for these simulations to enhance traditional thought experiments and future-oriented technology assessments.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
LLM-Cloud Complete: Leveraging Cloud Computing for Efficient Large Language Model-based Code Completion Utilizing the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Vehicle Telematics for Sustainable Growth in Small and Medium Firms (SMEs) Role of Artificial Intelligence and Big Data in Sustainable Entrepreneurship Impact of AI on Education: Innovative Tools and Trends Critique of Modern Feminism
×
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