Modeling Ethical and Operational Preferences in Automated Driving Systems

References

• Awad E, Dsouza S, Bonnefon J-F, Shariff A, Iyad R (2020) Crowdsourcing moral machines. Comm. ACM 63(3):48–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Awad E, Dsouza S, Kim R, Schulz J, Henrich J, Shariff A, Bonnefon J-F, Iyad R (2018) The Moral Machine experiment. Nature 563(7729):59–64.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basl J, Behrends J (2020) Why everyone has it wrong about the ethics of autonomous vehicles. Frontiers Engrg. Rep. Leading-Edge Engrg. 2019 Sympos. (National Academies Press, Washington, DC), 75–82.Google Scholar
• Beggiato M, Hartwich F, Krems J (2018) Using smartbands, pupillometry and body motion to detect discomfort in automated driving. Front. Human Neurosci. 12:338–350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bellem H, Schönenberg T, Krems JF, Schrauf M (2016) Objective metrics of comfort: developing a driving style for highly automated vehicles. Transportation Res. Part F: Traffic Psych. Behav. 41(Part A):45–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Birsch D, Fielder J (1994) The Ford Pinto Case: A Study in Applied Ethics, Business, and Technology (State University of New York Press, Albany).Google Scholar
• Bleichrodt H, Miyamoto J (2003) A characterization of quality-adjusted life-years under cumulative prospect theory. Math. Oper. Res. 28(1):181–193.Link, Google Scholar
• Bleichrodt H, Schmidt U, Zank H (2009) Additive utility in prospect theory. Management Sci. 55(5):863–873.Link, Google Scholar
• Blumenthal MS, Fraade-Blanar L, Best R, Irwin JL (2020) Safe enough: Approaches to assessing acceptable safety for automated vehicles. Report, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA569-1.html.Google Scholar
• Bommier A (2006) Uncertain lifetime and intertemporal choice: Risk aversion as a rationale for time discounting. Internat. Econom. Rev. 47(4):1223–1246.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonnefon JF, Shariff A, Rahwan I (2016) The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Sci. 352(6293):1573–1576.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caballero WN, Lunday BJ (2019) Influence modeling: Mathematical programming representations of persuasion under either risk or uncertainty. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 278(1):266–282.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caballero WN, Friend M, Blasch E (2021a) Adversarial machine learning and adversarial risk analysis in multi-source command and control. Kadar I, Blasch EP, Grewe LL, eds. Signal Processing, Sensor/Information Fusion, Target Recognition XXX, Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 11756 (SPIE, Bellingham, WA), 98–108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caballero WN, Rios Insua D, Banks D (2021b) Decision support issues in autonomous driving systems. Internat. Trans. Oper. Res., ePub ahead of print January 17, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.12936.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carpenter DP, Krause GA (2011) Reputation and public administration. Public Admin. Rev. 72(1):26–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cavagnaro D, Pitt M, Gonzalez R, Myung J (2013) Discriminating among probability weighting functions using adaptive design optimization. J. Risk Uncertainty 47(3):255–289.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen T, Kwiatkowska M, Simaitis A, Wiltsche C (2013) Synthesis for multi-objective stochastic games: An application to autonomous urban driving. Joshi K, Siegle M, Stoelinga M, D’Argenio PR, eds. Proc. 10th Internat. Conf. Quant. Evaluation Systems (Springer, Berlin), 322–337.Google Scholar
• Couce-Vieira A, Rios Insua D, Kosgodagan A (2020) Assessing and forecasting cybersecurity impacts. Decision Anal. 17(4):356–374.Link, Google Scholar
• Daziano RA, Sarrias M, Leard B (2017) Are consumers willing to pay to let cars drive for them? Analyzing response to autonomous vehicles. Transportation Res. Part C: Emerging Tech. 78(May):150–164.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dees R, Nestler S, Kewley R (2013) Wholesoldier performance appraisal to support mentoring and personnel decisions. Decision. Anal. 10(1):82–97.Link, Google Scholar
• Dovgan E, Javorski M, Tušar T, Gams M, Filipič B (2013) Comparing a multiobjective optimization algorithm for discovering driving strategies with humans. Expert Systems Appl. 40(7):2687–2695.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dovgan E, Javorski T, Tušar M, Gams B, Filipič M (2014) Discovering driving strategies with a multiobjective optimization algorithm. Appl. Soft Comput. 16(1):50–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Du Y, Liu C, Li Y (2018) Velocity control strategies to improve automated vehicle driving comfort. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine 10(1):8–18.Google Scholar
• Ermann MD, Lundman RJ, eds. (1978) Corporate and Governmental Deviance: Problems of Organizational Behavior in Contemporary Society (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• European Commission (2020) Ethics of connected and automated vehicles. Report, Publication Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
• European Environmental Agency (2016) Explaining road transport emissions: A non-technical guide. Accessed June 1, 2021, https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/explaining-road-transport-emissions.Google Scholar
• European Parliamentary Research Service (2018) A common EU approach to liability rules and insurance for connected and autonomous vehicles. Accessed June 1, 2021, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/615635/EPRS_STU(2018)615635_EN.pdf.Google Scholar
• Fombrun CJ (2012) The building blocks of corporate reputation: Definitions, antecedents, consequences. Pollock TG, Barnett ML, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 94–113.Google Scholar
• Gerdes JC, Thornton SM (2016) Implementable ethics for autonomous vehicles. Maurer M, Gerdes J, Lenz B, Winner H, eds. Autonomous Driving (Springer, Berlin), 87–102.Google Scholar
• Gibson B (2016) Analysis of autonomous vehicle policies. Kentucky Transportation Center Research Report KTC-16-25/PL-29-1F, University of Kentucky, Lexington.Google Scholar
• Gonzalez R, Wu G (1999) On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psych. 38(1):129–166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hartwich F, Beggiato M, Krems JF (2018) Driving comfort, enjoyment and acceptance of automated driving–effects of drivers’ age and driving style familiarity. Ergonomics 61(8):1017–1032.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hasler RM, Kehl C, Exadaktylos AK, Albrecht R, Dubler S, Greif R, Urwyler N (2012) Accuracy of prehospital diagnosis and triage of a Swiss helicopter emergency medical service. J. Trauma Acute Care Surgery 73(3):709–715.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Howard RA (1980) On making life and death decisions. Schwing RC, Albers WA, eds. Societal Risk Assessment (Springer, Boston), 89–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hubbard DW, Selersen R (2016) How to Measure Anything in Cybersecurity Risk (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jarvis J (1976) Killing, letting die and the trolley problem. Monist 59(2):204–217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M, Kim H, Kim BK (2012) Meeting expectations: A role-theoretic perspective on reputation. Pollock TG, Barnett ML, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 140–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeling G (2020) Why trolley problems matter for the ethics of automated vehicles. Sci. Engrg. Ethics 26(1):293–307.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (1984) Ethics, decision analysis, and public risk. Risk Anal. 4(2):117–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (1992) Value Focused Thinking (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (2007a) Developing objectives and attributes. Edwards W, Miles RF Jr, von Winterfeldt D, eds. Advances in Decision Analysis: From Foundations to Applications (Cambridge University Press, New York), 104–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (2007b) Modeling values for anti-terrorism analysis. Risk Anal. 27(3):585–596.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (2013) Identifying, prioritizing, and using multiple objectives. EURO J. Decision Processes 1(1–2):45–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL, Gregory R (2005) Selecting attributes to measure the achievement of objectives. Oper. Res. 53(1):1–11.Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-offs (with contribution by Richard F. Meyer) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL, von Winterfeldt D (2011) A value model for evaluation homeland security decisions. Risk Anal. 31(9):1470–1487.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kellen D, Steiner MD, Davis-Stober CP, Pappas NR (2020) Modeling choice paradoxes under risk: From prospect theories to sampling-based accounts. Cognitive Psych. 118(May):Article 101258.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kontek K, Lewandowski M (2018) Range-dependent utility. Management Sci. 64(6):2812–2832.Link, Google Scholar
• Li C, Czarnecki K (2018) Urban driving with multi-objective deep reinforcement learning. Preprint, submitted November 21, https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.08586.Google Scholar
• Lin P (2016) Why ethics matters for autonomous cars. Maurer M, Gerdes J, Lenz B, Winner H, eds. Autonomous Driving (Springer, Berlin), 69–85.Google Scholar
• Lindland R (2020) Audi Traffic Jam Pilot level 3 driving assistance tech delayed by stalled regulators. J.D. Power (April 28), https://www.jdpower.com/automotive-news/audi-traffic-jam-pilot-level-3-driving-assistance-tech-delayed-by-stalled-regulators.Google Scholar
• Merrick J, Grabowski M (2014) Decision performance and safety performance: A value-focused thinking study in the oil industry. Decision Anal. 11(2):105–116.Link, Google Scholar
• Milakis D, Van Arem B, Van Wee B (2017) Policy and society related implications of automated driving: A review of literature and directions for future research. J. Intelligent Transportation Systems 21(4):324–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Møller M, Haustein S (2013) Keep on cruising: Changes in lifestyle and driving style among male drivers between the age of 18 and 23. Transportation Res. Part F: Traffic Psych. Behav. 20(September):59–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nandi A, Chakraborty D, Vaz W (2015) Design of a comfortable optimal driving strategy for electric vehicles using multi-objective optimization. J. Power Sources 283(June):1–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Neill M (2008) What should egalitarians believe? Philos. Public Affairs 36(2):119–156.Google Scholar
• Prakash N, Cimini G, Stefanopoulou AG, Brusstar MJ (2016) Assessing fuel economy from automated driving: Influence of preview and velocity constraints. Conf. Proc. ASME 2016 Dynam. Systems Control Conf., vol. 2 (American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York), Article V002T19A001.Google Scholar
• Prelec D (1998) The probability weighting function. Econometrica 66(3):497–527.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ríos Insua D, Caballero WN, Naveiro R (2021) Managing driving modes in automated driving systems. Preprint, submitted July 1, https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.00280.Google Scholar
• Rios Insua D, Alfaro C, Gomez J, Hernandez-Coronado P, Bernal F (2019) Forecasting and assessing consequences of aviation safety occurrences. Safety Sci. 111(January):243–252.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulze WD, Kneese AV (1981) Risk in benefit-cost analysis. Risk Anal. 1(1):81–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulze WD, Kneese AV (1999) The marginal costs of greenhouse gas emissions. Energy J. 20(1):61–81.Google Scholar
• Siebert FW, Oehl M, Höger R, Pfister HR (2013) Discomfort in automated driving–the disco-scale. Stephanidis C, ed. HCI Internat. 2013—Posters’ Extended Abstracts, 15th Internat. Conf. Human-Comput. Interaction (Springer, Berlin), 337–341.Google Scholar
• Simon J, Regnier E, Whitney L (2014) A value-focused approach to energy transformation in the United States Department of Defense. Decision Anal. 11(2):117–132.Link, Google Scholar
• Society of Automobile Engineers (2018) Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. Technical report, SAE, Warrendale, PA.Google Scholar
• Stewart N, Chater N, Brown GD (2006) Decision by sampling. Cognitive Psych. 53(1):1–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsugawa S, Jeschke S, Shladover SE (2016) A review of truck platooning projects for energy savings. IEEE Trans. Intelligent Vehicles 1(1):68–77.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1991) Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. Quart. J. Econom. 106(4):1039–1061.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 5(4):297–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uber Advanced Technologies Group (2018) A principled approach to safety. Accessed February 25, 2021, https://www.uber.com/us/en/atg/safety/.Google Scholar
• U.S. Congressional Research Service (2020) Issues in autonomous vehicle testing and deployment. Accessed March 4, 2021, https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45985.Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Transportation (2020) Ensuring American leadership in automated vehicle technologies: Automated vehicles 4.0. Accessed February 25, 2021, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/policy-initiatives/automated-vehicles/360956/ensuringamericanleadershipav4.pdf.Google Scholar
• U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2016) Federal automated vehicles policy: Accelerating the next revolution in roadway safety. Accessed February 25, 2021, https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/federal_automated_vehicles_policy.pdf.Google Scholar
• Ustün T, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Rehm J (2010) Measuring Health and Disability: Manual for WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization, Geneva).Google Scholar
• van Riel CBM, Fombrun CJ (2007) Essentials of Corporate Communication (Routledge, Abingdon, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Viscusi K, Aldy J (2003) The value of a statistical life: A critical review of market estimates throughout the world. J. Risk Uncertainty 27(1):5–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Viscusi WK, Gentry EP (2015) The value of a statistical life for transportation regulations: A test of the benefits transfer methodology. J. Risk Uncertainty 51(1):53–77.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wakker PP (2010) Prospect Theory: For Risk and Ambiguity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Waymo LLC (2020) Comments of Waymo LLC on questions 2 through 8 of the administrative law judge’s ruling regarding the regulation of autonomous vehicles, before the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, R.12-12-011 (filed February 10). https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M328/K292/328292302.PDF.Google Scholar
• World Health Organization (2018) International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 11th revision. https://icd.who.int/browse11_2018-06/l-m/en.Google Scholar
• Yaari ME (1965) Uncertain lifetime, life insurance, and the theory of the consumer. Rev. Econom. Stud. 32(2):137–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zank H (2001) Cumulative prospect theory for parametric and multiattribute utilities. Math. Oper. Res. 26(1):67–81.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhou J, Zheng H, Wang J, Wang Y, Zhang B, Shao Q (2020) Multiobjective optimization of lane-changing strategy for intelligent vehicles in complex driving environments. IEEE Trans. Vehicular Tech. 69(2):1291–1308.Google Scholar