Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Contesting Artificial Moral Agents

Aisha Aijaz

TL;DR

A 5E framework for contesting AMAs based on five grounds: ethical, epistemological, explainable, empirical, and evaluative is proposed, which includes the spheres of ethical influences at individual, local, societal, and global levels.

Abstract

There has been much discourse on the ethics of AI, to the extent that there are now systems that possess inherent moral reasoning. Such machines are now formally known as Artificial Moral Agents or AMAs. However, there is a requirement for a dedicated framework that can contest the morality of these systems. This paper proposes a 5E framework for contesting AMAs based on five grounds: ethical, epistemological, explainable, empirical, and evaluative. It further includes the spheres of ethical influences at individual, local, societal, and global levels. Lastly, the framework contributes a provisional timeline that indicates where developers of AMA technologies may anticipate contestation, or may self-contest in order to adhere to value-aligned development of truly moral AI systems.

Contesting Artificial Moral Agents

TL;DR

A 5E framework for contesting AMAs based on five grounds: ethical, epistemological, explainable, empirical, and evaluative is proposed, which includes the spheres of ethical influences at individual, local, societal, and global levels.

Abstract

There has been much discourse on the ethics of AI, to the extent that there are now systems that possess inherent moral reasoning. Such machines are now formally known as Artificial Moral Agents or AMAs. However, there is a requirement for a dedicated framework that can contest the morality of these systems. This paper proposes a 5E framework for contesting AMAs based on five grounds: ethical, epistemological, explainable, empirical, and evaluative. It further includes the spheres of ethical influences at individual, local, societal, and global levels. Lastly, the framework contributes a provisional timeline that indicates where developers of AMA technologies may anticipate contestation, or may self-contest in order to adhere to value-aligned development of truly moral AI systems.
Paper Structure (15 sections, 2 figures)

This paper contains 15 sections, 2 figures.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Background
  3. Methodology: The Socratic Method
  4. 5E Framework
  5. Grounds for Contestation
  6. Ethical
  7. Epistemological
  8. Explainable
  9. Empirical
  10. Evaluative
  11. Spheres of Ethical Influence
  12. Application
  13. Conclusion
  14. 5E Framework Checklist
  15. Demonstrative Use Cases

Figures (2)

  • Figure 1: A visualization of the 5E framework that takes into account the five grounds of contesting AMAs, along with their spheres of ethical influence. A provisional timeline is also provided to facilitate a temporal understanding of the contestation of AMAs. This is provided in order for developers to anticipate contestation at various phases of AMA development. However, an AMA may be contested on any of these 5E grounds at any time with valid evidence.
  • Figure 2: This chart represents a visualization of the demonstrative cases discussed in this section. Each case is color-coded and the urgency of contestation is conveyed via the scores for each sphere of ethical influence (L0 to L4 represent impacts from no influence to global influence. Using the checklist and the information of ethical influence, any case may be represented on the 5E framework to attest to the contestability of an AMA on moral grounds.