mirror of
https://github.com/Brandon-Rozek/website.git
synced 2025-10-10 06:51:13 +00:00
Updated publications section to include paper entries and support for citation tags
This commit is contained in:
parent
722e1e068b
commit
eb02764efb
7 changed files with 190 additions and 13 deletions
34
content/paper/2207.01.md
Normal file
34
content/paper/2207.01.md
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: "A Framework for Testimony-Infused Automated Adjudicative Dynamic
|
||||
Multi-Agent Reasoning in Ethically Charged Scenarios"
|
||||
authors: [
|
||||
"Brandon Rozek",
|
||||
"Michael Giancola",
|
||||
"Selmer Bringsjord",
|
||||
"Naveen Sundar Govindarajulu"
|
||||
]
|
||||
publish_date: "2022/07"
|
||||
conference: "International Conference on Robot Ethics and Standards"
|
||||
isbn: "978-1-7396142-0-1"
|
||||
doi: "10.13180/icres.2022.18-19.07.009"
|
||||
firstpage: 47
|
||||
lastpage: 66
|
||||
language: "English"
|
||||
pdf_url: "https://www.clawar.org/icres2022/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/ICRES2022-Proceedings-manuscript.pdf#page=61"
|
||||
abstract: "In “high stakes” multi-agent decision-making under uncertainty, testimonial evidence flows from
|
||||
“witness” agents to “adjudicator” agents, where the latter must rationally fix belief and knowl-
|
||||
edge, and act accordingly. The testimonies provided may be incomplete or even deceptive, and
|
||||
in many domains are offered in a context that includes other kinds of evidence, some of which
|
||||
may be incompatible with these testimonies. Therefore, before believing a testimony and on that
|
||||
basis moving forward, the adjudicator must systematically reason to suitable strength of belief, in
|
||||
a manner that takes account of said context, and globally judges the core issue at hand. To fur-
|
||||
ther complicate matters, since the relevant information perceived by the adjudicator changes over
|
||||
time, adjudication is a nonmonontonic/defeasible affair: adjudicators must dynamically strengthen,
|
||||
weaken, defeat, and reinstate belief and knowledge. Toward the engineering of artificial agents ca-
|
||||
pable of handling these representation-and-reasoning demands arising from testimonial evidence
|
||||
in multi-agent decision-making, we explore herein extensions to one of our prior cognitive calculi:
|
||||
the Inductive Cognitive Event Calculus (IDCEC). We ground these extensions in a recent, tragic
|
||||
drone-strike scenario that unfolded in Kabul, Afghanistan, in the hope that use by humans of our
|
||||
brand of logic-based AI in future such scenarios will save human lives."
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue