2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)最新文献

{"title":"Co-designing Ethical Supports for Technology Practitioners","authors":"Ziqing Li, Ike Obi, S. Chivukula, Matthew Will, Janna Johns, Anne C. Pivonka, Thomas V Carlock, Ambika R Menon, Aayushi Bharadwaj, Colin M. Gray","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155098","url":null,"abstract":"In an era of ubiquitous digital interfaces and systems, technology and design practitioners must address a range of ethical dilemmas surrounding the use of persuasive design techniques and how to balance shareholder and end-user needs [2], [5]. Similarly, the increasing user concerns about unethical products and services [1] is paralleling a rise in regulatory interests in enforcing ethical design and engineering practices among technology practitioners, surfacing a need for further support. Although various scholars have developed frameworks and methods to support practitioners in navigating these challenging contexts [3], [4], often, there is a lack of resonance between these generic methods and the situated ethical complexities facing the practitioner in their everyday work. In this project, we designed and implemented a three-hour cocreation workshop with designers, engineers, and technologists to support them to develop bespoke ethics-focused action plans that are resonant with the ethical challenges they face in their everyday practice. In developing the co-creation session, we sought to answer the following questions to empower practitioners: • How can we support practitioners in developing action plans to address ethical dilemmas in their everyday work? and • How can we empower designers to design more responsibly? Building on these questions as a guide, we employed Miro, a digital whiteboard platform, to develop the co-creation experience. The final c o-creation e xperience w as d esigned w ith the visual metaphor of a “house” with four floors and multiple rooms that allowed participants to complete different tasks per room, all aimed towards the overall goal of developing participants' own personalized action plan in an interactive and collaborative way. We invited participants to share their stories and ethical dilemmas to support their creation and iteration of a personal action plan that they could later use in their everyday work context. Across the six co-creation sessions we conducted, participants (n=26) gained a better understanding of the drivers for ethical action in the context of their everyday work and developed an action plan through the co-creation workshop that enabled them to constructively engage with ethical challenges in their professional context. At the end of the session, participants were provided the action plans they created to allow them to use it in their practice. Furthermore, the co-design workshops were designed such that practitioners could take them away (the house and session guide) and run them independently at their organization or another context to support their objectives. We describe the building and the activities conducted in each floor below and will provide a pictorial representation of the house with the different floors, rooms, and activities on the poster presentation. a) First floor-Welcome, Introduction, Reflection: The first floor of the virtual house was designed to allow participants t","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125484946","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"ETHICS-2023 Session E4 - Tutorial: AI Safety, governance, and alignment tutorial","authors":"Sherri Lynn Conklin, G. Sett","doi":"10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10154970","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10154970","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126803060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Value Sensitive Design meets Participatory Value Evaluation for autonomous systems in Defence","authors":"C. B. Burken, S. Spruit, Lotte Fillerup, N. Mouter","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155025","url":null,"abstract":"We use Value Sensitive Design for the development of an ethical framework for autonomous systems in Defence in the Australian context. Two novel empirical data gathering methods are deployed for mining stakeholder's values, namely Group Decision Room (GDR) and Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE). GDR findings reveal a general concern for environmental values, geo-political and economic stability. A PVE based on these and other values is designed around an autonomous mine counter underwater vessel and an autonomous drone that drops bombs.","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122594684","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Perceptions of AI Ethics on Social Media","authors":"Ayse Ocal","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155069","url":null,"abstract":"Since the emergence of Artificial intelligence (AI), despite a common expectation that AI should be ‘ethical’ [1], there are many different interpretations, assumptions, and expectations about what constitutes \"ethical AI\" and which ethical problems and requirements are pointed out by the public. Even though many private companies and research institutions have highlighted present and possible future problems, needs, and guidelines associated with AI ethics, relevant public visions regarding how \"ethical AI\" can be constituted [1] have not been explored sufficiently. For obtaining public opinions, although questionnaires and interviews are commonly used, the questions in these methods are designed based on only the researchers' preferences, and this could be a limitation. Social media data, however, are produced by users freely [2], and many people share their ideas in social media discussions [3]. Social media data usage, therefore, has been growing in various research studies. Researchers intending to utilize social media as a data source predominantly harness Twitter data, yet in recent years Reddit has also gained the attention of scholars with the same research purpose, as in [2], [3]. Reddit is a huge social media platform involving over 50 million daily active users with diverse mentalities shaped by different backgrounds, prior beliefs, personal experiences, and personalities, from various geographical locations, and 100 thousand active communities, thereby it brings different segments of the public together. Moreover, users benefit from a level of anonymity on Reddit not typically accomplished on other social media platforms [4], thereby users may feel more secure and share more honest thoughts on a topic, thus the Reddit data have been used to gather public opinions in prior research as in [3]. Through the lens of technological frames [5], to explore social media users' interpretations, assumptions, and expectations about how ethical AI is built, and which problems hinder building ethical AI, Reddit conversations were analyzed. More specifically, a corpus consisting of 998 unique Reddit post titles and their corresponding 16611 comments extracted from 15 AI-related subreddits were identified by using topic modelling supported by human judgment for frame identification as in [6] based on BERTopic [7]. The findings show that perceptions about AI ethics are clustered around several themes (AI's gender bias; humans' gender bias about perceived gender of bots; regulation and patent laws related to AI use; AI spreading disinformation; AI making fake faces, videos, music; misuse of personal data; and AI impact on crime), with deviations about how these themes are interpreted, what problems or actors they pertain to, and what appropriate measures should be taken to address problems pointed out by the public. While some of these ethical issues were also highlighted in prominent AI ethics literature as in [8], the findings of this study indicated","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130715748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Using Fictional Role-Plays for Engineering and Computing Ethics Instruction","authors":"Ashish Hingle, A. Johri","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155068","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155068","url":null,"abstract":"This poster presents the implementation of roleplay scenarios (RPSs) to introduce engineering and computing students to the fundamentals of technology ethics and participate in a collaborative discussion of navigating ethical dilemmas beyond the classroom. As algorithmic systems become more ubiquitous across all domains, concerns about using an opaque, black-box system to decide everyday activities are growing. Researchers working with these systems have described issues in creating these systems relating to fairness, accountability, and trust. They also highlight concerns with the outcomes, resulting in misinformation, biased predictive consequences, and harm against groups of people. Historical cases are available for many ethical scenarios and issues within STEM disciplines, though the focus of technology ethics today tends to focus more on predictive and potential outcomes. With this historical lens, students may find placing the case studies in an amorphous technological landscape challenging. As technology changes, so do the types and possibilities of ethical dilemmas students will face in their everyday work after graduation. To this end, we created and implemented fictitious cases grounded in reality to allow students to focus on the core question- given a situation where algorithms raise ethical concerns or dilemmas, how can you work with different perspectives to collaboratively make the best decision? The cases, which include topics such as facial recognition, algorithmic risk of lending, sustainability of electronic products, and farming in a high-tech world, each address the concept of ethics with a focus on the process rather than the result. Our work is theoretically guided by the situated learning paradigm, emphasizing the expression of perspectives in a collaborative environment while using story elements to highlight dilemmas. By doing so, we prime students to develop an ethical mindset and engage with the complexity of the systems at play. Over the past two years, we implemented these cases in a course that addresses technology in a global environment. The course describes applied ethical principles and frameworks and guides students towards informed decision-making, as it is a course used as an accreditation requirement. Our findings suggest that 1) students reported a higher level of engagement with the content through the analysis of surveys, 2) were able to recognize more (breadth and depth) of ethical dilemmas, and 3) came to a consensus recommendation on what the appropriate action should be. This works highlights an interactive way to engage students about ethics in the classroom while building practical decision-making skills on relevant developing technologies. Additionally, through iterating on the implementation within the classroom, this work reduces barriers to adoption for similar instructional modes.","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133978674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Macroethics in Aerospace Engineering: Implementing Ethics Lessons into Undergraduate Courses and Analyzing Student Perceptions of Issues within the Discipline","authors":"Elizabeth A. Strehl, Mary H. Ennis, Corin L. Bowen, A. Johnson","doi":"10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10155052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10155052","url":null,"abstract":"This poster provides an overview of a project that embeds macroethics lessons into undergraduate aerospace This poster provides an overview of a project that embeds macroethics (Herkert, 2005) lessons into undergraduate aerospace engineering courses and investigates students' perceptions of ethical issues within the discipline. Macroethics education in engineering, which addresses the collective social responsibility within the engineering profession and societal decisions about the use of technology, has been traditionally left out of U.S. aerospace engineering programs, often leaving students ill-equipped to assess and address the positive and negative impacts of their future career field on humanity (Benham et al., 2022; Bielefeldt et al., 2017; Herkert, 2005). Teaching macroethical analyses help novice engineers better understand the real implications of their work in society (e.g. Andrade & Tomblin, 2018; Benham et al., 2021; Colby & Sullivan, 2008; Gupta, 2017; Jimerson et al., 2013; Palmer et al., 2022; Wareham et al., 2006). Aerospace engineering is not exempt from its own social responsibility, as is seen through the issues such as climate change, space resource mining, space debris, the military-industrial complex, and space settlement. Aerospace is also a discipline that has been historically dominated by white, cis-gendered, affluent men, which affects the lens through which macroethical concepts in the field are perceived. Thus, the inclusion of macroethical concepts in undergraduate aerospace engineering curricula also addresses improving diversity, equity, and inclusion in the field. In our design-based research, we simultaneously design macroethics curricula for undergraduate aerospace engineering courses and develop contextualized knowledge about undergraduate students' perceptions and awareness of macroethical issues in aerospace engineering. Our research has been conducted at two large, historically white, research-intensive, public universities in the Western and Midwestern United States. These universities are referred to as WU and MU in this abstract. We collected data on WU students� experiences from the lesson via anonymous Qualtrics surveys and used the results to inform the development of another survey that was distributed to students in the MU aerospace engineering program. Macroethics lessons have been implemented in two consecutive years of a sophomore aerospace vehicle design course at WU. An updated version of the macroethics lesson was then piloted in a junior-level spacecraft dynamics course at MU in Fall 2022, introducing students to a relevant macroethical topic for the course: orbital debris. In Spring 2023, another iteration of the lesson was implemented again in a sophomore-level aerospace vehicle design course at WU, that allowed students to discuss and explore diverse perspectives on topics such as space settlements and the military-industrial complex. The sociotechnical components of these lessons present","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132661238","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Developing a Method to Distinguish Between Normative and Ethical Behaviors in Engineering","authors":"Athena Lin, J. Hess","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10154956","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10154956","url":null,"abstract":"Engineering education aims to prepare its graduates to be ethical and responsible engineers. Though ethics has been recognized as an important aspect of engineering education, there is not a definitive consensus on what ethical engineering is. The engineering ethics literature reveals expansive definitions of and extensive debates about what constitutes ethical engineering practice. Though scholars may not agree about what ethical engineering entails, it is worthwhile to consider what ethical engineering means to those who practice it daily in their work.","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132371468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Exploring Approaches to Artificial Intelligence Governance: From Ethics to Policy","authors":"Dayoung Kim, Qin Zhu, Hoda Eldardiry","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10155067","url":null,"abstract":"There has been a trend among various stakeholders for AI governance, such as the government, industry, and academia, that advocates for a shift from AI ethics to AI policy. In this paper, we briefly introduce the motivation for such a change and two complementary reports about AI ethics policy development to help AI ethics researchers operationalize abstract AI ethics principles into actionable policy items. We also discuss the implications of the policy approach to AI governance for training the next generation of AI professionals.","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"105 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126956711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"ETHICS-2023 Session A2 - Panel: The arc of a global engineering education","authors":"","doi":"10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10155041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ethics57328.2023.10155041","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128768121","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Being Proactive for Responsible AI: Analyzing Multiple Sectors for Innovation via Systematic Literature Review","authors":"Lucas J. Wiese, Danielle Schiff, Alejandra J. Magana","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10154947","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS57328.2023.10154947","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Questions surrounding the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) have been debated for decades [1]. However, in recent years there have been multiple initiatives, scholarly reviews, and policy documents to identify and define ethical issues in play [2]. The efforts to bring high-level principles to applicable practice are complex and can be lost in translation [3]. Moreover, a call to be proactive, rather than reactive, stems from a deduction of intentions behind responsible innovation, value-centric design principles, education efforts, and representative data management techniques. Contemporary applications of AI are complex and difficult to explain, edit, and deal with once integrated in a natural system [4] [5]. Therefore, the analysis conducted within this systematic literature review (SLR) will clarify methods to promote and engage practice on the front end of ethical and responsible AI. As such, the research question is explored: How does each helix in the Quintuple Innovation model address responsible and ethical AI technology with anticipatory or proactive approaches? Methods: To conduct this ongoing research, an adaptation of the PRISMA framework and Hess & Fore's 2017 methodological approach guides the SLR [6] [7]. We included journal articles that were written in English and published between 2018-2023. The collected studies aim to examine how academic scholarship approaches to responsible AI within academia, government, industry, civil society, or the natural environment (the Quintuple Helix). The Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PhilPapers databases were used to identify a set of prominent publications in this field: AI & Society, Nature Machine Intelligence, Minds and Machines, IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society, AI and Ethics, Science and Engineering Ethics, and Communications of the ACM. A key limitation of this study is that it cannot gather the entirety of literature written about the topics of proactively promoting ethical AI due to the vast size and definitional complexity of the associated fields. These inclusion criteria allow the researchers to manage the data and draw meaningful insights from the most current thinking that is reflected in the rapid development of AI innovation we see today. Results and discussion: This poster will present preliminary results and the theoretical framework that guided the qualitative coding process. Additionally, this poster will serve as a forum to collect experts' opinions about what they would like to see from this SLR dataset, and how we can incorporate those elements into our coding. As a result, this data will be able to inform future work to investigate multiple gaps in the literature. For instance, U.S. Government work not protected by U.S. copyright this study will result in a theoretical framework that identifies proactive approaches to responsible and sustainable AI aligned with the five sectors for innovation. Inspired from [8], the effects of investments","PeriodicalId":203527,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology (ETHICS)","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126252284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}