With the advance of AI technology, it seems that robots might take over decision making from humans in many aspects of daily life. For humans to accept it, nevertheless, the decisions robots make must be morally acceptable for humans. A natural thought is that robots should be taught how to apply moral reasoning as humans do. For example, the Moral Machine project by MIT attempts to assimilate robots’ moral reasoning into humans’. In other words, robots should act as moral agents like us. Call it the anthropomorphic view. I oppose the anthropomorphic view. Based on the insight from P. F. Strawson’s view about reactive attitudes, I argue that it is morally wrong and psychologically unacceptable for robots to interfere with our autonomy.
Tsung-Hsing Ho‘s main research interests include epistemic normativity, the normativity of mental attitudes, and the fitting-attitude account of value. He is an assistant professor of the department of philosophy at National Chung Cheng University (Taiwan).
A new generation of implantable AI brain–computer interfaces devices (advisory system) have been tested for the first time in a human clinical trial, with significant success. These AI predictive implants detect specific neuronal activity patterns, such as an epileptic seizure, and provide information to help patients to respond to the upcoming neuronal events; as such they are advisory system. By forecasting a seizure, the AI device gives control to patients on how to respond and decide on a therapeutic course ahead of time. In theory, these AI advisory system implants could be used for a large range of clinical and non-clinical application; such as augmenting and empowering agential cognitive capacities (i.e. reasoning, learning, decision making information retrieval and analysis), but also predicting unwanted outcomes (i.e. depressive episodes; addictive habits, socially reprehensive conducts). Being advised by an implantable AI system can positively increase individual’ quality of life; however, doing so does not come free of ethical concerns. There is currently a lack of evidence concerning the various impacts of invasive AI brain implants on patients’ decision-making processes, especially how being in the decisional loop impacts patients’ sense of autonomy. This presentation addresses these gaps by providing data that we obtained from a first-in-human clinical trial involving patients implanted with advisory brain devices. This presentation explores ethical issues related to the potential psychological harms from an AI device that ‘knowns better’ than the implanted individual.
Frédéric Gilbert focuses on bio-ethics. He is an expert in neuro-ethics. He is not a scientist. He is a philosopher. By monitoring patients with brain devices, Dr Gilbert grapples with the ethical questions posed by invasive brain technologies. His research informs the debates that guide policy regulation, especially in regard to human clinical and experimental trials.
It was clear at the start of this century that we had entered into a paradigm of behaviours and relationships that push established definitions and disciplines to be reformulated. Technology is transforming from a mechanism that used to mediate dialogue and discourse among humans to itself becoming potential interlocutor in those activities. This presentation proposes that this development elevates the discussion in design, engineering, humanities and social sciences to a new sense of reality that is complex and difficult to decipher because intelligent technologies do not have a unique niche and materiality. One discipline cannot explain them alone since their embodiment can alternate between and be simultaneously physical and digital within live, fluid and changing networks and connections. Designers and engineers need to expand their field of action from making and measuring tangible and software artefacts to understand the social and psychological implications of animate objects in society. Humanities and social sciences should also expand from interpreting the cultural and social impact of media and information technologies. This type of after-the-fact study, as interpretation of the present based on the archeology of the past, lags behind the present engineering of society that is based on future visions of technology; never neutral from human-driven economic and political plan and intervention. Interdisciplinary research on robotics and artificial intelligence in society should lead to a better path for that evolution among their limitations, assistive potential and vernacular belief that ranges from a Terminator’s apocalypse and the naïve wish for a perfect and free high-tech society. In the meanwhile, 4.0 industrial revolution already shows a skill void between a knowers’ elite and a group formed by blue collar and manual workforce. For now, mainly the latter group is being swallowed into that growing gap in the middle with a vortex force of automation and unemployment. Innovative findings will come from reconceptualising labor and participation beyond robotic architectural concerns (e.g. programming, wiring, mechanical engineering) and humanities and social sciences critical interpretation (e.g. history, large databases, social media). Importantly, analysis should concentrate on relationships between humans, humans and intelligent objects and among intelligent objects. That will force the reframing of their activities, contextuality (defining meaning in reference to a larger expression), intercontextuality (participants’ motifs that intersect and mirror one another) and transcontextuality (capacity to create connections between things or ideas that are not typically associated with each other). These are matters of intersubjectivity that confer similar sociotechnical and animate qualities to humans and artificial participants. Particularly what are their similar and unique capacities for emotions and feelings, identity and belonging that allow them to cross boundaries. Designing of new and appropriate solutions would be the result of redrawing the two disconnected narratives of humans and artificial intelligences together by revaluing each side on their self-recognition (as function of applying self-awareness to distinguish between the self and the other), and self-efficacy (degree of confidence on the ability to perform a behaviour, succeed and accomplish a task in a specific situation).
Mauricio Novoa is a designer and academic with more than 35 years’ experience in the industry from product to industrial, architecture, advertising, communications and marketing (2D, 3D and 4D time based, events and moving image). As an academic for the last 12 years, he has been Director of the Academic Program in the School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics from 2012 to 2015 (end January) leading the School through discipline transformation, writing the new curriculum, shaping the new vision for their courses and implementing them as to “bringing creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship”. He is a PhD candidate at WSU’s Institute for Culture and Society (Globalization and Cultural Economy stream) investigating a “New Knowledge Ecology for Industrial Design Artefact and Expertise in Education and Industry”. Together with industry, he currently leads a REDI Connections project researching “New Learning and Environment”. His work as an artist has been exhibited nationally and internationally as early as in the touring exhibition “Chilean Artists of the 20th Century”, Chile, South America (1984) and later in Australia as in “The Boundary Rider: 9th Biennale of Sydney” (1992/93) and subsequent touring exhibitions.
Since the ancient times people perceive human shapes in non-human objects and depict Gods in their resemblance. Therefore, it should not be surprising that the advancements in technology lead to the development of products that are becoming increasingly similar to us in their form and behavior. It is especially evident in the field of Social Robotics dominated by humanoids and a growing number of androids. The development of these robots is believed to facilitate Human-Robot Interaction since humans are used to interact with other humans. Furthermore, it helps us to understand better our own nature and what does it mean to be a human. However, understanding the consequences of anthropomorphism and the process itself received less attention. Currently, anthropomorphism is used to describe humanlike appearance of robots as well as attribution of mind to them. However, without understanding the psychological process of attributing humanlike properties or characteristics to non-human agents, it may be impossible to form theories that can accommodate often contradictory results of studies. In particular, it may be helpful to differentiate between objective properties of robots and the subjective perception of them by the users, and consider a possibility that anthropomorphism may be an outcome of more than a single process. This in turn can lead to unique consequences in human-robot interactions.
Jakub Złotowski is a postdoctoral fellow at the Cluster of Excellence Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC), Bielefeld University and a visiting fellow at the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Queensland University of Technology. He received his PhD in Human-Robot Interaction at the University of Canterbury in 2015. His research focus is on anthropomorphism and social aspects of Human-Robot Interaction. He has also conducted research in the field of Android Science. His interdisciplinary research approach spans the areas of Human-Computer Interaction, Social Psychology, Cognitive Science and Machine Learning. He has worked at several international institutions including the University of Salzburg (Austria), ATR (Japan), Osaka University (Japan) and Abu Dhabi University (UAE).
There’s a lot of discussion in many different fora about AI and Ethics. In this talk, I’ll attempt to identify what new issues AI brings to the table, as well as where AI requires us to address otherwise old issues. I will cover topics from autonomous cars via predictive analytics to killer robots.
Toby Walsh is Scientia Professor of Artificial Intelligence at the University of New South Wales and Data61. He was named by the Australian newspaper as a “rock star” of Australia’s digital revolution. Professor Walsh is a strong advocate for limits to ensure AI is used to improve our lives. He has been a leading voice in the discussion about lethal autonomous weapons (aka killer robots) speaking at the UN in New York and Geneva on the topic. He is a Fellow of the Australia Academy of Science. He appears regularly on TV and radio, and has authored two books on AI for a general audience, the most recent entitled “2062: The World that AI Made”.
As the field of Social Robotics rapidly grows there is a need to reconsider robot aesthetics, behaviour, learning and adaptability to varying social contexts in order to improve fluency, effectiveness and human interest during long term interaction with a robot. There is also a pressing need for a more informed multi-disciplinary approach in the design, development and evaluation of these systems. Velonaki’s presentation will focus on experiential human robot interaction as a key function and a driver for developing social robots. In order to be effective in social contexts, robots ultimately need the ability to ‘understand’ human behaviours and social settings to integrate in a fluid and non-intrusive manner. An important next step is to model social environments for a wider range of interactions with a robot —interactions that trigger a greater variety of behavioural patterns, rather than mere task performance. Furthermore, Velonaki will argue that is imperative that our encounters with social robots must be continually engaging and valued in order to maintain our long term interest and attention.
Mari Velonaki is a Professor of Social Robotics at the University of New South Wales, Sydney. She is the founder and director of the Creative Robotics Lab (Art & Design UNSW) and the founder and director of the National Facility for Human Robot Interaction Research (UNSW, USYD, UTS, St Vincent’s Hospital). Mari’s robots and interactive installations have been exhibited worldwide, including: Victoria & Albert Museum, London; National Art Museum Beijing; Gyeonggi Museum of Modern Art, Korea; Aros Aarhus Museum of Modern Art, Denmark; Wood Street Galleries, Pittsburgh; Millennium Museum – Beijing Biennale of Electronic Arts; Ars Electronica, Linz; European Media Arts Festival, Osnabruck; ZENDAI Museum of Modern Art, Shanghai; Art Gallery of NSW, Sydney, Museum of Contemporary Arts, Sydney; Conde Duque Museum, Madrid. Mari Velonaki’s practice and research is situated in the multi-disciplinary field of Social Robotics. Her approach to Social Robotics has been informed by aesthetics and design principles that stem from the theory and practice of Interactive Media Art. Velonaki has made significant contributions in the areas of Social Robotics, Media Art and Human-Machine Interface Design. Her career outputs across these fields are extensive. Velonaki began working as a media artist/researcher in the field of responsive environments and interactive interface design in 1997. She pioneered experimental interfaces that incorporate movement, speech, touch, breath, electrostatic charge, artificial vision and robotics, allowing for the development of haptic and immersive relationships between participants and interactive agents. Mari’s designed her first robots in 2004 as part of a major Australian Research Council (ARC) project ‘Fish–Bird’ (2004-07) which led at the Australian Centre for Field Robotics (ACFR USYD). In 2006 she founded the Centre for Social Robotics. In 2009 she was awarded an ARC Fellowship (2009–2013) leading to the creation of her humanoid robot ‘Diamandini’. In 2014, she was voted by Robohub – a large robotics community of researchers, educators and business- as one of the world’s 25 women in robotics you need to know about.
Including children in the design of educational technologies that they use daily is essential and their involvement is important. However, it is unclear how this involvement should take place when designing a robotic assistant in a classroom environment. In this talk, I will present our approach to involving children in the development of a robotic assistant in a classroom environment. I will first describe the development of a robot design toolkit (Robo2Box) aimed at involving children in the design of classroom robots. Then, I will report on some of the studies we conducted to understand and evaluate our approach using the toolkit. Thereafter, I will outline some of the challenges and lessons learned from our approach to eliciting children’s requirements using the Robo2Box toolkit. Finally, I will conclude with possible design implications and future directions.
Dr Mohammad Obaid is a Lecturer at the UNSW Art and Design, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Dr. Obaid received his BSc., MSc. (First Class Honors) and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science from the University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2004, 2007 and 2011, respectively. In April 2018, he received his Docent degree (Associate Prof. rank) from Uppsala University (Sweden). He worked at several international research centers including the Human Centered Multimedia Lab (HCM Lab), University of Augsburg (Germany), the Human Interface Technology Lab New Zealand (HITLab NZ), University of Canterbury (New Zealand), the t2i Lab, Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden), and the Social Robotics Lab, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala University (Sweden). Dr. Obaid is one of the founders of the Applied Robotics Group at the Interaction Design Division at Chalmers University of Technology (established in 2015). He is the (co-)author of over 60 publications within the areas of his research interests on Human-Robot Interaction and Human-Computer Interaction. In recent years, he has served in organizing committees and program committees of main HCI/HRI related conferences such as CHI, HRI, HAI, VRST, and NordiCHI.
In my presentation I want to clarify some of the basic philosophical issues concerning the question whether robots or ‘artificial agents’ could be subjects or objects of recognition. I will discuss what recognition actually is, or what its forms are, and how they are related to sociality and mindedness. On the view that I defend, recognition in a particular ‘purely intersubjective’ sense is fundamental both to sociality as we know and expect it, and to having a mind in the sense that we know and expect it. This does not preclude that robots or artificial agents could be appropriate objects of ‘recognition’ in other senses of the term (some less some more trivial), independently of their capacity to sociality, mindedness and intersubjective recognition.
Heikki Ikäheimo is senior lecturer at UNSW Sydney. His research areas include the theory of recognition, personhood, social ontology, and critical social philosophy. Including his publications are the monograph Anerkennung (De Gruyter 2014), and the co-edited volumes Recognition and Social Ontology (Brill 2011), Ambivalences of Recognition (Columbia UP, forthcoming), and Handbuch Anerkennung (Springer, forthcoming).
We are in the midst of an info-revolution. It is a time of deep learning and big data. The robots are coming! Artificial intelligences are coming! Indeed, both are already here, and developing fast. This makes the practical puzzle of social robotics urgent: How can we create these new agents so that they interact fluidly with us? In considering this question, this presentation will look at lessons we can draw from the interactive turn that dominates enactive and embodied cognitive science and the best new theorizing about the basis of human social cognition. These considerations prompt the crucial question: to what extent do we need to ensure that social robots and AIs share our ‘form of life’ if we are to welcome and trust their company and merely have effective, but potentially unpredictable, interactions with them.
Daniel D. Hutto is Senior Professor of Philosophical Psychology at the University of Wollongong, Associate Dean of Research of the Faculty of Law, Humanities, and the Arts, and member of the Australian Research Council College of Experts. He is co-author of the award-winning Radicalizing Enactivism (MIT, 2013) and its sequel, Evolving Enactivism (MIT, 2017). His other recent books, include: Folk Psychological Narratives (MIT, 2008) and Wittgenstein and the End of Philosophy (Palgrave, 2006). He is editor ofNarrative and Understanding Persons (CUP, 2007) and Narrative and Folk Psychology(Imprint Academic, 2009). A special yearbook, Radical Enactivism, focusing on his philosophy of intentionality, phenomenology and narrative, was published in 2006. He is regularly invited to speak not only at philosophy conferences but at expert meetings of anthropologists, clinicians, educationalists, narratologists, neuroscientists and psychologists.
The talk will introduce the problems associated with the children rehabilitation biomedical applications based on computational intelligence and will emphasis on the realism of using computational intelligence and possible realistic machine learning. It will cover bio-signal/image processing and pattern recognition; it will highlight on the EMG based driven systems. It will include a novel working myoelectric controller for an autism, children mobility, and hand rehabilitation device that can deal with such issues. The proposed systems are based on computational intelligence techniques that included developing an accurate pattern recognition, which can work well in real time. It will also cover image pattern recognition for skin cancer and the realism approach.
Dr. Adel Al-Jumaily is Associate Professor in the University of Technology Sydney. He holds a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering (AI). His research covers the fields of Computational Intelligence, Bio-Mechatronic Systems, Health and Biomedical Technology, Vision-based cancer diagnosing, and Bio-signal/image pattern recognition. Adel has developed a novel approach for Electromyogram (EMG) control of prosthetic devices for rehabilitation and contributed to signal/image processing, and computer vision. He has successfully developed many nature-based algorithms for bio-signal/image pattern recognition problems. Adel sits on the editorial boards of a number of journals and is chair or technical committee member for more than 60 international conferences. He is now Editor-in-Chief of one journal and an Associate Editor-in-Chief of two Journals. He is a senior member of IEEE and many other professional committees.