IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v19y2022i1p21-43.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modeling Ethical and Operational Preferences in Automated Driving Systems

Author

Listed:
  • William N. Caballero

    (United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80840)

  • Roi Naveiro

    (Institute of Mathematical Sciences, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

  • David Ríos Insua

    (Institute of Mathematical Sciences, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

Whereas automated driving technology has made tremendous gains in the last decade, significant questions remain regarding its integration into society. Given its revolutionary nature, the use of automated driving systems (ADSs) is accompanied by myriad novel quandaries relating to both operational and ethical concerns that are relevant to numerous stakeholders (e.g., governments, manufacturers, and passengers). When considering any such problem, the ADS’s decision-making calculus is always a central component. This is true for concerns about public perception and trust to others regarding explainability and legal certainty. Therefore, in this manuscript, we set forth a general decision-analytic framework tailorable to multitudinous stakeholders. More specifically, we develop and validate a generic tree of ADS management objectives, explore potential attributes for their measurement, and provide multiattribute utility functions for implementation. Given the contention surrounding numerous ethical concerns in ADS operations, we explore how each of the aforementioned components can be tailored in accordance with the stakeholder’s desired ethical perspective. A simulation environment is developed upon which our framework is tested. Within this environment we illustrate how our approach can be leveraged by stakeholders to make strategic trade-offs regarding ADS behavior and to inform policymaking efforts. In so doing, our framework is demonstrated as a practical, tractable, and transparent means of modeling ADS decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • William N. Caballero & Roi Naveiro & David Ríos Insua, 2022. "Modeling Ethical and Operational Preferences in Automated Driving Systems," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 21-43, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:19:y:2022:i:1:p:21-43
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2021.0441
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.2021.0441
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2021.0441?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Han Bleichrodt & Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2009. "Additive Utility in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 863-873, May.
    2. Jay Simon & Eva Regnier & Laura Whitney, 2014. "A Value-Focused Approach to Energy Transformation in the United States Department of Defense," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 117-132, June.
    3. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    4. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    5. Viscusi, W Kip & Aldy, Joseph E, 2003. "The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates throughout the World," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 5-76, August.
    6. Antoine Bommier, 2006. "Uncertain Lifetime And Intertemporal Choice: Risk Aversion As A Rationale For Time Discounting," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 47(4), pages 1223-1246, November.
    7. Ralph L. Keeney & Robin S. Gregory, 2005. "Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-11, February.
    8. Caballero, William N. & Lunday, Brian J., 2019. "Influence modeling: Mathematical programming representations of persuasion under either risk or uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 266-282.
    9. Edmond Awad & Sohan Dsouza & Richard Kim & Jonathan Schulz & Joseph Henrich & Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2018. "The Moral Machine experiment," Nature, Nature, vol. 563(7729), pages 59-64, November.
    10. Krzysztof Kontek & Michal Lewandowski, 2018. "Range-Dependent Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2812-2832, June.
    11. Horst Zank, 2001. "Cumulative Prospect Theory for Parametric and Multiattribute Utilities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 67-81, February.
    12. Ralph L. Keeney & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2011. "A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland Security Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(9), pages 1470-1487, September.
    13. Ralph L. Keeney, 1984. "Ethics, Decision Analysis, and Public Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 117-129, June.
    14. Daniel Cavagnaro & Mark Pitt & Richard Gonzalez & Jay Myung, 2013. "Discriminating among probability weighting functions using adaptive design optimization," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 255-289, December.
    15. Ralph L. Keeney & Timothy L. McDaniels, 1992. "Value-Focused Thinking about Strategic Decisions at BC Hydro," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 94-109, December.
    16. Menahem E. Yaari, 1965. "Uncertain Lifetime, Life Insurance, and the Theory of the Consumer," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 32(2), pages 137-150.
    17. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    18. W. Viscusi & Elissa Gentry, 2015. "The value of a statistical life for transportation regulations: A test of the benefits transfer methodology," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 53-77, August.
    19. Robert A. Dees & Scott T. Nestler & Robert Kewley, 2013. "WholeSoldier Performance Appraisal to Support Mentoring and Personnel Decisions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 82-97, March.
    20. Han Bleichrodt & John Miyamoto, 2003. "A Characterization of Quality-Adjusted Life-Years Under Cumulative Prospect Theory," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 181-193, February.
    21. repec:reg:rpubli:282 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vicki M. Bier & Gilberto Montibeller, 2023. "From the Editor and Chair of the Award Committee: 2022 Clemen–Kleinmuntz Decision Analysis Best Paper Award," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 86-87, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Vitalie Spinu, 2020. "Searching for the Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 93-112, January.
    2. Han Bleichrodt & Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2009. "Additive Utility in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 863-873, May.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. William N. Caballero & Ethan Gharst & David Banks & Jeffery D. Weir, 2023. "Multipolar Security Cooperation Planning: A Multiobjective, Adversarial-Risk-Analysis Approach," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 16-39, March.
    5. Gebhard Geiger, 2012. "Multi-attribute non-expected utility," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 196(1), pages 263-292, July.
    6. Andrea C. Hupman & Jay Simon, 2023. "The Legacy of Peter Fishburn: Foundational Work and Lasting Impact," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Sudeep Bhatia & Graham Loomes & Daniel Read, 2021. "Establishing the laws of preferential choice behavior," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(6), pages 1324-1369, November.
    8. Veronika Köbberling & Peter P. Wakker, 2003. "Preference Foundations for Nonexpected Utility: A Generalized and Simplified Technique," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 395-423, August.
    9. Dogucan Mazicioglu & Jason R. W. Merrick, 2018. "Behavioral Modeling of Adversaries with Multiple Objectives in Counterterrorism," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 962-977, May.
    10. Lipman, Stefan A. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & Attema, Arthur E., 2020. "Living up to expectations: Experimental tests of subjective life expectancy as reference point in time trade-off and standard gamble," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    11. Horst Zank, 2010. "On probabilities and loss aversion," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 243-261, March.
    12. Aitor Couce-Vieira & David Rios Insua & Alex Kosgodagan, 2020. "Assessing and Forecasting Cybersecurity Impacts," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 356-374, December.
    13. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2012. "A test of independence of discounting from quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 22-34.
    14. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    15. Katarzyna Werner & Horst Zank, 2012. "Foundations for Prospect Theory Through Probability Midpoint Consistency," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1210, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    16. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    17. Han Bleichrodt & José Luis Pinto, 2000. "An experimental test of loss aversion and scale compatibility," Working Papers, Research Center on Health and Economics 467, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    18. Lei Wang & Qing Liu & Tongle Yin, 2018. "Decision-making of investment in navigation safety improving schemes with application of cumulative prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 232(6), pages 710-724, December.
    19. Yoram Halevy, 2008. "Strotz Meets Allais: Diminishing Impatience and the Certainty Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 1145-1162, June.
    20. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier & Pinto, Jose Luis, 2016. "An elicitation of utility for quality of life under prospect theory," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 121-134.
    21. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:19:y:2022:i:1:p:21-43. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.