nach oben

Ethics and Information Technology

Erschienen in:

01.06.2013 | Original Paper

Framing robot arms control

verfasst von: Wendell Wallach, Colin Allen

Erschienen in: Ethics and Information Technology | Ausgabe 2/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The development of autonomous, robotic weaponry is progressing rapidly. Many observers agree that banning the initiation of lethal activity by autonomous weapons is a worthy goal. Some disagree with this goal, on the grounds that robots may equal and exceed the ethical conduct of human soldiers on the battlefield. Those who seek arms-control agreements limiting the use of military robots face practical difficulties. One such difficulty concerns defining the notion of an autonomous action by a robot. Another challenge concerns how to verify and monitor the capabilities of rapidly changing technologies. In this article we describe concepts from our previous work about autonomy and ethics for robots and apply them to military robots and robot arms control. We conclude with a proposal for a first step toward limiting the deployment of autonomous weapons capable of initiating lethal force.

Vorheriger Artikel Should autonomous robots be pacifists?

Nächster Artikel Arms control for armed uninhabited vehicles: an ethical issue

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

The U.S. Army Science Board (2002) describes a scale of ten levels of autonomous behavior beyond Manual—Remote Control (0). At the lowest level is Simple Automation (1) followed by Automated Tasks and Functions (2), Scripted Missions (3), Semi-Automated Missions/Simple Decision Making (4), Complex Missions Specific Reasoning (5), Dynamically Mission Adaptable (6), Synergistic Multi-Mission Reasoning (7), Human-Like Autonomy in a Mixed Team (8), Autonomous Teams with Unmanned Leader/Mission Manager (9), Autonomous—Conglomerate (10). Most of the levels of autonomous behavior are based upon projected future technological capabilities. The discussion in this paper is directed at the development of systems capability of initiating lethal force at level (4) and level (5).

Arkin does propose that a human supervisor could override the ethical governor.

The U.S. military will wish to permit autonomous defensive systems such as anti-ballistic missile systems (e.g., Patriot) and ship defense systems (e.g., Phalanx).

We are grateful to Jürgen Altmann and an anonymous reviewer for pointing this out.

Altmann, J. (2009). Preventive arms control for uninhabited military vehicles. In R. Capurro & M. Nagenborg (Eds.), Ethics for robotics. AKA Verlag, Heidelberg.

Arkin, R. (2009). Governing lethal behavior in autonomous robots. Chapman and Hall: CRC.CrossRef

Arkin, R. (2012). Presentations at the EPIIC international symposium on conflict in the 21st century. Tufts University, February 22, 23.

Asaro, P. (2008). How just could a robot war be? In P. Brey, A. Briggle, & K. Waelbers (Eds.), Current issues in computing and philosophy (pp. 50–64). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.

Borenstein, J. (2008). The ethics of autonomous military robots. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2(1): Article 2. doi:10.2202/1941-6008.1036. Available at: http://www.bepress.com/selt/vol2/iss1/art2.

Dahm, W. J. A. (2012). Killer robots are science fiction. The Wall Street Journal, February 16th 2011. Available online at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204883304577221590015475180.html. Accessed 13 Oct 2012

Dancy, J. (2011). Contribution to discussion on “The Future of Moral Machines”, On the human. National Humanities Center. http://onthehuman.org/2011/12/the-future-of-moral-machines/. Accessed 1 May 2012.

Dennett, D. C. (1978). Brainstorms. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Finn, P. (2011). A future for drones: Automated killing. The Washington post, September 19, 2011. Available online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-security/a-future-for-drones-automated-killing/2011/09/15/gIQAVy9mgK_story.html. Accessed 19 December 2011.

Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Gips, J. (1991). Towards the ethical robot. In K. G. Ford, C. Glymour, & P. J. Hayes (Eds.), Android epistemology (pp. 243–252). Cambridge: MIT press.

Gormley, D. M. (2008). Missile contagion: Cruise missile proliferation and the threat to international security. London: Praeger.

Hollnagel, E., Woods, D. D., & Leveson, N. (Eds.). (2006). Resiliance engineering: Concepts and precepts. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.

Kim, T.-G. (2010). Machine gun-armed robots to guard DMZ. The Korea Times, June 24, 2010. Available online at http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2010/06/123_68227.html. Accessed 19 December 2011.

Krishnan, A. (2009). Killer robots: Legality and ethicality of autonomous weapons. Burlington: Ashgate.

Lin, P. (2011). Drone-ethics briefing: What a leading robot expert told the CIA, The Altantic. December 15, 2011. Available online at http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/12/drone-ethics-briefing-what-a-leading-robot-expert-told-the-cia/250060/. Accessed 19 December 2011.

Lokhorst, G., & van den Hoven, J. (2012). Responsibility for military robots. In P. Lin, K. Abney, & G. A. Bekey (Eds.), Robot ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Matthias, A. (2011). Algorithmic moral control of war robots: Philosophical questions. Law, Innovation and Technology, 3(2), 279–301.CrossRef

McCarthy, J., & Hayes, P. J. (1969). Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence. In D. Michie, & B. Meltzer (Eds.), Machine Intelligence 4 (pp. 463–502). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Sharkey, N. (2011). The automation and proliferation of military drones and the protection of civilians. Law, Innovation and Technology, 3(2), 229–240.CrossRef

Sharkey, N. (2012). Killing made easy: From joysticks to politics. In P. Lin, K. Abney, & G. A. Bekey (Eds.), Robot ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Singer, P. W. (2009). Wired for war. New York: Penguin Press.

Sparrow, R. (2009). Predators or plowshares? Arms control of robotic weapons. IEEE Technology and Society, 28(1), 25–29.MathSciNetCrossRef

Sparrow, R. (2011). Robotic weapons and the future of war. In J. Wolfendale, & P. Tripodi (Eds.), New wars and new soldiers: Military ethics in the contemporary world (pp. 117–133). Surrey, UK & Burlington, VA: Ashgate.

Stahl, B. C. (2002). Can a computer adhere to the categorical imperative? A contemplation of the limits of transcendental ethics in IT. Paper presented at the international conference on systems research, informatics and cybernetics, Baden Baden, GE.

Taleb, N. N. (2007). The black swan: the impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House.

U.S. Army Science Board. (2002). Ad Hoc study on human robot interface issues. Available online at http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA411834. Accessed 19 April 2012.

U.S. Army Medical Department. (2008). MHAT-IV. http://www.armymedicine.army.mil/reports/mhat/mhat_iv/mhat-iv.cfm. Accessed 20 December 2011.

U.S. Air Force. (2009). Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Plan 2009–2047. Available at http://www.govexec.com/pdfs/072309kp1.pdf. Accessed 19 April 2012.

U.S. Department of Defense (2009). Fiscal Year 2009–2034 Unmanned systems integrated roadmap. http://www.acq.osd.mil/psa/docs/UMSIntegratedRoadmap2009.pdf. Accessed 20 December 2011.

U.S. Department of Defense. (2012). Task force report: The role of autonomy in DoD systems. http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/autonomy.pdf. Accessed 22 September 2012.

Wallach, W., & Allen, C. (2009). Moral machines: Teaching robots right from wrong. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Woods, D. D., & Hollnagel, E. (2006). Joint cognitive systems: Patterns in cognitive systems engineering. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

Titel: Framing robot arms control
verfasst von: Wendell Wallach
Colin Allen
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2013
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Ethics and Information Technology / Ausgabe 2/2013
Print ISSN: 1388-1957
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-8439
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-012-9303-0

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2013

Arms control for armed uninhabited vehicles: an ethical issue

Drones, information technology, and distance: mapping the moral epistemology of remote fighting

Armed military robots: editorial

Militainment and mechatronics: Occultatio and the veil of science fiction cool in United States Air Force advertisements

On the moral responsibility of military robots

Should autonomous robots be pacifists?