Dataset Information

An unethical optimization principle.

ABSTRACT: If an artificial intelligence aims to maximize risk-adjusted return, then under mild conditions it is disproportionately likely to pick an unethical strategy unless the objective function allows sufficiently for this risk. Even if the proportion ? of available unethical strategies is small, the probability p U of picking an unethical strategy can become large; indeed, unless returns are fat-tailed p U tends to unity as the strategy space becomes large. We define an unethical odds ratio, ? (capital upsilon), that allows us to calculate p U from ?, and we derive a simple formula for the limit of ? as the strategy space becomes large. We discuss the estimation of ? and p U in finite cases and how to deal with infinite strategy spaces. We show how the principle can be used to help detect unethical strategies and to estimate ?. Finally we sketch some policy implications of this work.

SUBMITTER: Beale N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7428226 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An unethical optimization principle.

Beale Nicholas N Battey Heather H Davison Anthony C AC MacKay Robert S RS

Royal Society open science 20200701 7

If an artificial intelligence aims to maximize risk-adjusted return, then under mild conditions it is disproportionately likely to pick an unethical strategy unless the objective function allows sufficiently for this risk. Even if the proportion η of available unethical strategies is small, the probability p U of picking an unethical strategy can become large; indeed, unless returns are fat-tailed p U tends to unity as the strategy space b ...[more]

PMID: 32874640

Similar Datasets

Project description:Rationing in health care is controversial, and even more so in pediatrics. Children are an inherently vulnerable group because they are reliant on their parents and caregivers to make decisions in their best interests and have no political voice. Historically, there has been general acceptance of the need to ration healthcare at a systems level, however there is controversy over whether healthcare professionals should be involved in rationing at the bedside. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that bedside rationing is unavoidable, at least in times of extreme resource scarcity. Internationally, there has been significant ethical analysis and guideline development to guide intensive care rationing decisions in the event that resources are overwhelmed. This paper explores the principles underlying distributive justice in healthcare rationing and discusses how these were operationalized in ethical guidelines for the COVID-19 pandemic. In fact, rationing is unavoidable and occurs constantly in everyday nursing and medical ICU practice, often in mundane and uncontroversial ways. Some argue that these everyday decisions are not true rationing decisions, but resource allocation, or stewardship decisions. We argue there are no clear lines between resource allocation and rationing decisions, rather that they occur on a spectrum. These everyday rationing decisions are particularly susceptible to personal biases that are often implicit. Due to the subtle and constant nature of most everyday rationing decisions, specific guideline development will rarely be practical or appropriate. However, it is possible to develop other processes to improve decision making. There are a variety of strategies we recommend for this including, encouraging reflective practice; developing explicit frameworks that promote collaborative decision making; being transparent about resource allocation and rationing decisions with colleagues, patients, and families; and promoting a workplace culture of speaking up and accessing support in identifying and managing everyday rationing decisions.

Dataset Information

An unethical optimization principle.

Publications

An unethical optimization principle.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets