S. Kate Devitt

Tara Roberson, Stephen Bornstein, Rain Liivoja et al.

What does it mean to be responsible and responsive when developing and deploying trusted autonomous systems in Defence? In this short reflective article, we describe a case study of building a trusted autonomous system - Athena AI - within an industry-led, government-funded project with diverse collaborators and stakeholders. Using this case study, we draw out lessons on the value and impact of embedding responsible research and innovation-aligned, ethics-by-design approaches and principles throughout the development of technology at high translation readiness levels.

Susannah Kate Devitt

21st Century war is increasing in speed, with conventional forces combined with massed use of autonomous systems and human-machine integration. However, a significant challenge is how humans can ensure moral and legal responsibility for systems operating outside of normal temporal parameters. This chapter considers whether humans can stand outside of real time and authorise actions for autonomous systems by the prior establishment of a contract, for actions to occur in a future context particularly in faster than real time or in very slow operations where human consciousness and concentration could not remain well informed. The medical legal precdent found in 'advance care directives' suggests how the time-consuming, deliberative process required for accountability and responsibility of weapons systems may be achievable outside real time captured in an 'advance control driective' (ACD). The chapter proposes 'autonomy command' scaffolded and legitimised through the construction of ACD ahead of the deployment of autonomous systems.

Susannah Kate Devitt, Jason Scholz, Timo Schless et al.

Artificial intelligences (AI) will increasingly participate digitally and physically in conflicts, yet there is a lack of trused communications with humans for humanitarian purposes. In this paper we consider the integration of a communications protocol (the 'whiteflag protocol'), distributed ledger 'blockchain' technology, and information fusion with AI, to improve conflict communications called 'protected assurance understanding situation and entitities' PAUSE. Such a trusted human-AI communication network could provide accountable information exchange regarding protected entities, critical infrastructure, humanitiarian signals and status updates for humans and machines in conflicts. We examine several realistic potential case studies for the integration of these technologies into a trusted human-AI network for humanitarian benefit including mapping a conflict zone with civilians and combatants in real time, preparation to avoid incidents and using the network to manage misinformation. We finish with a real-world example of a PAUSE-like network, the Human Security Information System (HSIS), being developed by USAID, that uses blockchain technology to provide a secure means to better understand the civilian environment.

S. K. Devitt

Robotic and Autonomous Agricultural Technologies (RAAT) are increasingly available yet may fail to be adopted. This paper focusses specifically on cognitive factors that affect adoption including: inability to generate trust, loss of farming knowledge and reduced social cognition. It is recommended that agriculture develops its own framework for the performance and safety of RAAT drawing on human factors research in aerospace engineering including human inputs (individual variance in knowledge, skills, abilities, preferences, needs and traits), trust, situational awareness and cognitive load. The kinds of cognitive impacts depend on the RAATs level of autonomy, ie whether it has automatic, partial autonomy and autonomous functionality and stage of adoption, ie adoption, initial use or post-adoptive use. The more autonomous a system is, the less a human needs to know to operate it and the less the cognitive load, but it also means farmers have less situational awareness about on farm activities that in turn may affect strategic decision-making about their enterprise. Some cognitive factors may be hidden when RAAT is first adopted but play a greater role during prolonged or intense post-adoptive use. Systems with partial autonomy need intuitive user interfaces, engaging system information, and clear signaling to be trusted with low level tasks; and to compliment and augment high order decision-making on farm.

Susannah Kate Devitt

The rise of human-information systems, cybernetic systems, and increasingly autonomous systems requires the application of epistemic frameworks to machines and human-machine teams. This chapter discusses higher-order design principles to guide the design, evaluation, deployment, and iteration of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS) based on epistemic models. Epistemology is the study of knowledge. Epistemic models consider the role of accuracy, likelihoods, beliefs, competencies, capabilities, context, and luck in the justification of actions and the attribution of knowledge. The aim is not to provide ethical justification for or against LAWS, but to illustrate how epistemological frameworks can be used in conjunction with moral apparatus to guide the design and deployment of future systems. The models discussed in this chapter aim to make Article 36 reviews of LAWS systematic, expedient, and evaluable. A Bayesian virtue epistemology is proposed to enable justified actions under uncertainty that meet the requirements of the Laws of Armed Conflict and International Humanitarian Law. Epistemic concepts can provide some of the apparatus to meet explainability and transparency requirements in the development, evaluation, deployment, and review of ethical AI.

Angela Daly, S Kate Devitt, Monique Mann

In this chapter we argue that discourses on AI must transcend the language of 'ethics' and engage with power and political economy in order to constitute 'Good Data'. In particular, we must move beyond the depoliticised language of 'ethics' currently deployed (Wagner 2018) in determining whether AI is 'good' given the limitations of ethics as a frame through which AI issues can be viewed. In order to circumvent these limits, we use instead the language and conceptualisation of 'Good Data', as a more expansive term to elucidate the values, rights and interests at stake when it comes to AI's development and deployment, as well as that of other digital technologies. Good Data considerations move beyond recurring themes of data protection/privacy and the FAT (fairness, transparency and accountability) movement to include explicit political economy critiques of power. Instead of yet more ethics principles (that tend to say the same or similar things anyway), we offer four 'pillars' on which Good Data AI can be built: community, rights, usability and politics. Overall we view AI's 'goodness' as an explicly political (economy) question of power and one which is always related to the degree which AI is created and used to increase the wellbeing of society and especially to increase the power of the most marginalized and disenfranchised. We offer recommendations and remedies towards implementing 'better' approaches towards AI. Our strategies enable a different (but complementary) kind of evaluation of AI as part of the broader socio-technical systems in which AI is built and deployed.

Susannah Kate Devitt, Tamara Rose Pearce, Alok Kumar Chowdhury et al.

Against the backdrop of a social media reckoning, this paper seeks to demonstrate the potential of social tools to build virtuous behaviours online. We must assume that human behaviour is flawed, the truth can be elusive, and as communities we must commit to mechanisms to encourage virtuous social digital behaviours. Societies that use social platforms should be inclusive, responsive to evidence, limit punitive actions and allow productive discord and respectful disagreement. Social media success, we argue, is in the hypothesis. Documents are valuable to the degree that they are evidence in service of, or to challenge an idea for a purpose. We outline how a Bayesian social platform can facilitate virtuous behaviours to build evidence-based collective rationality. The chapter outlines the epistemic architecture of the platform's algorithms and user interface in conjunction with explicit community management to ensure psychological safety. The BetterBeliefs platform rewards users who demonstrate epistemically virtuous behaviours and exports evidence-based propositions for decision-making. A Bayesian social network can make virtuous ideas powerful.