Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Game Theory Formulation for Ethical Decision Making

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotics and Well-Being

Part of the book series: Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering ((ISCA,volume 95))

Abstract

The inclusion of autonomous robots among everyday human environments has suggested that these robots will be facing ethical decisions regarding trade-offs where machines will choose some human attributes over the attributes of other humans. We argue in this paper that on a regular instance, algorithms for such decisions should not only be deterministic but instead, the decision will be better framed as an optimal mixed strategy in the sense of Nash equilibria in game theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    www.surveymonkey.com.

References

  1. Alaieri F, Vellino A (2016) Ethical decision making in robots: autonomy, trust and responsibility. In: Agah A, Cabibihan JJ, Howard AM, Salichs MA, He H (eds) Social robotics: 8th international conference, ICSR, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 159–168

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bonnefon JF, Shariff A, Rahwan I (2016) The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science 352(6293):1573–1576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Di Fabio U, et al (2017) Ethics commission automated and connected driving. Technical report, Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure, Germany www.mbdi.de

  4. Diestel R (1997) Graph theory. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Dodig-Crnkovic G, Persson D (2008) Sharing moral responsibility with robots: a pragmatic approach. In: Proceedings of the 2008 conference on tenth Scandinavian conference on artificial intelligence: SCAI 2008, IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 165–168

    Google Scholar 

  6. Govindan S, Wilson R (2003) A global Newton method to compute Nash equilibria. J Econ Theory 110(1):65–86

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Greene JD (2016) Our driverless dilemma. Science 352(6293):1514–1515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hall JS (2011) Ethics for machines. In: Anderson M, Anderson SL (eds) Machine ethics (Chap. 3). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 28–44

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kadar EE, Köszeghy A, Virk GS (2017) Safety and ethical concerns in mixed human-robot control of vehicles. In: Aldinhas Ferreira MI, Silva Sequeira J, Tokhi MO, Kadar EE, Virk GS (eds) A world with robots: international conference on robot ethics: ICRE 2015. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 135–144

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lemke CE, Howson JT (1964) Equilibrium points of bimatrix games. J SIAM 12(2):413–423

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Moore S (1999) Driverless cars should sacrifice their passengers for the greater good just not when I’m the passenger. The Conversation Media Group Ltd https://theconversation.com/driverless-cars-should-sacrifice-their-passengers-for-the-greater-good-just-not-when-im-the-passenger-61363

  12. Myerson RB (1997) Game theory: analysis of conflict. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Nash JF (1950) Equilibrium points in N-Person games. Natl Acad Sci USA 36(1):48–49. http://www.pnas.org/content/36/1/48.full.pdf+html

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Porter R, Nudelman E, Shoham Y (2004) Simple search methods for finding a Nash equilibrium. In: McGuinness DL, Ferguson G (eds) AAAI-04, 19th national conference on artificial intelligence, 16th conference on innovative applications of artificial intelligence, AAAI/MIT Press, San Jose, California, pp 664–669

    Google Scholar 

  15. R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria http://www.R-project.org/

  16. Rahwan I (2017) What moral decisions should driverless cars make? TED talks, TED.com

    Google Scholar 

  17. Savani R, von Stengel B (2004) Exponentially many steps for finding a nash equilibrium in a bimatrix game. In: FOCS-04, 45th annual ieee symposium on foundations of computer science. IEEE Computer Soc., pp 258–267

    Google Scholar 

  18. Scheutz M, Malle BF (2014) Think and do the right thing - a plea for morally competent autonomous robots. In: 2014 IEEE international symposium on ethics in science, technology and engineering, pp 1–4

    Google Scholar 

  19. von Stengel B (2002) Computing equilibria for two-person games. In: Aumann RJ, Hart S (eds) Handbook of game theory, vol 3 (Chap. 45). Elsevier, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 1723–1759

    Google Scholar 

  20. Winfield AFT, Blum C, Liu W (2014) Towards an ethical robot: internal models, consequences and ethical action selection. In: Mistry M, Leonardis A, Witkowski M, Melhuish C (eds) Advances in autonomous robotics systems - 15th Annual Conference, TAROS, vol 8717, Springer, LNCS, pp 85–96

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information and Communication Technology, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia

    Vladimir Estivill-Castro

Authors
  1. Vladimir Estivill-Castro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vladimir Estivill-Castro .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Maria Isabel Aldinhas Ferreira

  2. Institute for Systems and Robotics, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal

    João Silva Sequeira

  3. Endoenergy Systems Limited, Cambridge, UK

    Gurvinder Singh Virk

  4. School of Engineering, London South Bank University, London, UK

    Mohammad Osman Tokhi

  5. Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK

    Endre E. Kadar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Estivill-Castro, V. (2019). Game Theory Formulation for Ethical Decision Making. In: Aldinhas Ferreira, M., Silva Sequeira, J., Singh Virk, G., Tokhi, M., E. Kadar, E. (eds) Robotics and Well-Being. Intelligent Systems, Control and Automation: Science and Engineering, vol 95. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12524-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation