Specification, Validation and Verification of Social, Legal, Ethical, Empathetic and Cultural Requirements for Autonomous Agents

Autonomous agents are increasingly being proposed for use in healthcare, assistive care, education, and other applications governed by complex human-centric norms. To ensure compliance with these norms, the rules they induce need to be unambiguously defined, checked for consistency, and used to verify the agent. In this paper, we introduce a framework for formal specification, validation and verification of social, legal, ethical, empathetic and cultural (SLEEC) rules for autonomous agents. Our framework comprises: (i) a language for specifying SLEEC rules and rule defeaters (that is, circumstances in which a rule does not apply or an alternative form of the rule is required); (ii) a formal semantics (defined in the process algebra tock-CSP) for the language; and (iii) methods for detecting conflicts and redundancy within a set of rules, and for verifying the compliance of an autonomous agent with such rules. We show the applicability of our framework for two autonomous agents from different domains: a firefighter UAV, and an assistive-dressing robot.

[1]  I. Habli,et al.  From Pluralistic Normative Principles to Autonomous-Agent Rules , 2022, Minds and Machines.

[2]  J. Grundy,et al.  Operationalising ethics in artificial intelligence for healthcare: a framework for AI developers , 2022, AI and Ethics.

[3]  S. Dogramadzi,et al.  A Study on the Effects of Cognitive Overloading and Distractions on Human Movement During Robot-Assisted Dressing , 2022, Frontiers in Robotics and AI.

[4]  P. Inverardi,et al.  Exosoul: ethical profiling in the digital world , 2022, HHAI.

[5]  P. Inverardi The Challenge of Human Dignity in the Era of Autonomous Systems , 2021, Perspectives on Digital Humanism.

[6]  Jessica R. Cauchard,et al.  Drones in Firefighting: A User-Centered Design Perspective , 2021, MobileHCI.

[7]  Ana Cavalcanti,et al.  Sound reasoning in tock-CSP , 2021, Acta Informatica.

[8]  John Brunero,et al.  Reasons and Defeasible Reasoning , 2021 .

[9]  Alvaro Miyazawa,et al.  RoboStar Technology: A Roboticist’s Toolbox for Combined Proof, Simulation, and Testing , 2020, Software Engineering for Robotics.

[10]  Andry Rakotonirainy,et al.  A Methodology for Encoding Regulatory Rules , 2020, MIREL@JURIX.

[11]  M. Karliuk,et al.  Working Document: Toward a Draft Text of a Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence , 2020 .

[12]  Jeannette M. Wing Trustworthy AI , 2020, Commun. ACM.

[13]  Madhulika Srikumar,et al.  Principled Artificial Intelligence: Mapping Consensus in Ethical and Rights-Based Approaches to Principles for AI , 2020, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[14]  Anna Jobin,et al.  The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines , 2019, Nature Machine Intelligence.

[15]  Mauro Innocente,et al.  Self-organising swarms of firefighting drones: Harnessing the power of collective intelligence in decentralised multi-robot systems , 2019, J. Comput. Sci..

[16]  Michael Fisher,et al.  On Proactive, Transparent, and Verifiable Ethical Reasoning for Robots , 2019, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[17]  Jim Woodcock,et al.  RoboChart: modelling and verification of the functional behaviour of robotic applications , 2019, Software & Systems Modeling.

[18]  Carlo Ghezzi,et al.  Specification Patterns for Robotic Missions , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[19]  Hiram Ponce,et al.  A Conceptual Design of a Firefighter Drone , 2018, 2018 15th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Computing Science and Automatic Control (CCE).

[20]  Clare Dixon,et al.  Formal Specification and Verification of Autonomous Robotic Systems , 2018, ACM Comput. Surv..

[21]  L. Floridi Soft Ethics and the Governance of the Digital , 2018, Philosophy & Technology.

[22]  Michael Fisher,et al.  Formal verification of ethical choices in autonomous systems , 2016, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[23]  Michael Fisher,et al.  Towards Verifiably Ethical Robot Behaviour , 2015, AAAI Workshop: AI and Ethics.

[24]  Sebastian Wrede,et al.  A Survey on Domain-Specific Languages in Robotics , 2014, SIMPAR.

[25]  A. W. Roscoe,et al.  FDR3 - A Modern Refinement Checker for CSP , 2014, TACAS.

[26]  J. Horty Reasons as Defaults , 2012 .

[27]  James H. Moor,et al.  The Nature, Importance, and Difficulty of Machine Ethics , 2006, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[28]  K. Mitchem,et al.  Be Proactive , 2005 .

[29]  Davide Sangiorgi,et al.  Communicating and Mobile Systems: the π-calculus, , 2000 .

[30]  Sinem Getir Yaman,et al.  Specification and Validation of Normative Rules for Autonomous Agents , 2023, FASE.

[31]  O. Raabe,et al.  A Model-Based Framework for Simplified Collaboration of Legal and Software Experts in Data Protection Assessments , 2022, GI-Jahrestagung.

[32]  Bill Roscoe,et al.  The automated verification of timewise refinement , 2013 .

[33]  Keisuke Takayama,et al.  Simulation, Modeling, and Programming for Autonomous Robots , 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[34]  A. Eddington,et al.  The Nature , 2007 .

[35]  J. Pollock Defeasible Reasoning , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[36]  Jan A. Bergstra,et al.  Algebra of Communicating Processes with Abstraction , 1985, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[37]  Robin Milner,et al.  Calculi for Synchrony and Asynchrony , 1983, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[38]  C. A. R. Hoare,et al.  Communicating sequential processes , 1978, CACM.