On Automating the Doctrine of Double Effect
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The doctrine of double effect (DDE) is a long-studied ethical principle that governs when actions that have both positive and negative effects are to be allowed. The goal in this paper is to automate DDE. We briefly present DDE, and use a first-order modal logic, the deontic cognitive event calculus, as our framework to formalize the doctrine. We present formalizations of increasingly stronger versions of the principle, including what is known as the doctrine of triple effect. We then use our framework to simulate successfully scenarios that have been used to test for the presence of the principle in human subjects. Our framework can be used in two different modes: One can use it to build DDE-compliant autonomous systems from scratch, or one can use it to verify that a given AI system is DDE-compliant, by applying a DDE layer on an existing system or model. For the latter mode, the underlying AI system can be built using any architecture (planners, deep neural networks, bayesian networks, knowledge-representation systems, or a hybrid); as long as the system exposes a few parameters in its model, such verification is possible. The role of the DDE layer here is akin to a (dynamic or static) software verifier that examines existing software modules. Finally, we end by presenting initial work on how one can apply our DDE layer to the STRIPS-style planning model, and to a modified POMDP model.This is preliminary work to illustrate the feasibility of the second mode, and we hope that our initial sketches can be useful for other researchers in incorporating DDE in their own frameworks.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 3; 2023: 1; 2024: 1.
7 papers.
- 2023On the Computational Complexity of Ethics: Moral Tractability for Minds and Machinescited by 2
- 2021Randomized Classifiers vs Human Decision-Makers: Trustworthy AI May Have to Act Randomly and Society Seems to Accept Thiscited by 1
- 2022Action Languages Based Actual Causality for Computational Ethics: a Sound and Complete Implementation in ASPcited by 1
- 2022Technology and Consciousnesscited by 1
- 2021AI Can Stop Mass Shootings, and Morecited by 0
- 2022Automated Kantian Ethics: A Faithful Implementationcited by 0
- 2024Virtue Ethics For Ethically Tunable Robotic Assistantscited by 0
- 2024Virtue Ethics For Ethically Tunable Robotic Assistants23 Jul 2024
- 2023On the Computational Complexity of Ethics: Moral Tractability for Minds and Machines8 Feb 2023
- 2022Automated Kantian Ethics: A Faithful Implementation20 Jul 2022
- 2022Technology and Consciousness17 Jul 2022
- 2022Action Languages Based Actual Causality for Computational Ethics: a Sound and Complete Implementation in ASP5 May 2022
- 2021Randomized Classifiers vs Human Decision-Makers: Trustworthy AI May Have to Act Randomly and Society Seems to Accept This15 Nov 2021
- 2021AI Can Stop Mass Shootings, and More5 Feb 2021