References
- Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: Critique des postulats et axiomes de l'école américaine. Econometrica, 21, 503–546. doi:10.2307/1907921
- Anderson, J., Nidhi, K., Stanley, K., Sorenson, P., Samaras, C., & Oluwatola, O. (2014). Autonomous vehicle technology: A guide for policymakers. California: Rand Corporation.
- Anderson, M., & Anderson, S. (2007). Machine ethics: Creating an ethical intelligent agent. AI Magazine, 28, 15–26. doi:10.1609/aimag.v28i4.2065
- Arkin, R., Ulam, P., & Wagner, A. (2012). Moral decision-making in autonomous systems: enforcement, moral emotions, dignity, trust, and deception. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100, 571–589. In volume doi:10.1109/JPROC.2011.2173265
- Baron, J. (1985) Rationality and intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Bell, D. (1983). Risk premiums for decision regret. Management Science, 29, 1156–1166. doi:10.1287/mnsc.29.10.1156
- Bentzen, M. (2016). The principle of double effect applied to ethical dilemmas of social robots. In A.J. Tallón-Ballesteros (Ed.), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications: Vol. 290. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Robophilosophy (pp. 268–279). Aarhus, Denmark: IOS Press. doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-708-5-268
- Bloomfield, R. & Bishop, P. (2010). Safety and assurance cases: Past, present and possible future: an Adelard perspective. In C. Dale, T. Anderson (Eds.), Making Systems Safer - Proceedings of the Eighteenth Safety-Critical Systems Symposium. Bristol, UK: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-84996-086-1_4
- Cokey, E., & Kelley, C. (2009). Cognitive abilities and superior decision making. Judgement and Decision Making, 4, 20–33.
- Common Criteria Management Board. (2007). Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation. CCMB-2007-09-004.
- Dennis, L., Fisher, M., Slavkovik, M., & Webster, M. (2016). Formal verification of ethical choices in autonomous systems. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 77, 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.robot.2015.11.012
- Evans, J. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Brighton, Erlbaum
- Fagnant, D. & Kockelman, K. (2014). The travel and environmental implications of shared autonomous vehicles, using agent-based model scenarios. In Proceedings of the 93rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Review Board (pp. 1–13). Washington, D.C.: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2013.12.001
- Foot, P. (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxford Review, 5, 5–16. Retrieved from https://philpapers.org/archive/FOOTPO-2.pdf
- Gerdes, J., & Thornton, S. (2016). Implementable ethics for autonomous vehicles. In M. Maurer, J. Gerdes, B. Lenz & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomous Driving (pp. 87–102). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
- Gips, J. (1995). Towards the ethical robot. In K.M. Ford, C. Glymour & P.J. Hayes (Eds.), Android Epistemology (pp. 243–252). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Goodall, N. (2016). Away from trolley problems and toward risk management. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 30, 810–821. doi:10.1080/08839514.2016.1229922
- Hawkins, R., Habli, I., Kelly, T., & McDermid, J. (2013). Assurance cases and prescriptive software certification: a comparative Study. Safety Science, 59, 55–71. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.04.007
- Hawkins, R., Habli, I., Kolovos, D., Paige, R. & Kelly, T. (2015). Weaving an Assurance Case from Design: A Model-based Approach. In Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering, Florida: IEEE. doi:10.1109/HASE.2015.25
- Health and Safety Executive. (2001). Reducing risks, protecting people. Retrieved from http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/r2p2.pdf
- Health and Safety Executive. (2002). The precautionary principle: policy and application. Retrieved from http://www.hse.gov.uk/aboutus/meetings/committees/ilgra/pppa.htm
- IEEE Global Initiative. (2018). Ethically aligned design, v2.0. Retrieved from https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-standards/standards/web/documents/other/ead_v2.pdf
- Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291. doi:10.2307/1914185
- Kalra, N. & Groves, D. (2017). The enemy of good - estimating the cost of waiting for nearly perfect automated vehicles, Technical Report RR-2150 RC, Rand Corporation. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2150.html
- Kelly, T. & Weaver, R. (2004). The goal structuring notation — a safety argument notation. In Proceedings of Dependable Systems and Networks 2004 Workshop on Assurance Cases.
- Kelly, T. (2007). Reviewing Assurance Arguments — A Step-By-Step Approach. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks DSN 84–95.
- Kelly, T., Habli, I., Nicholson, M., Megone, C. & Mcnish, K. (2014). The ethics of acceptable safety. In Proceedings of the 23rd Safety-critical Systems Symposium. Bristol: Safety Critical Systems Club. doi:10.13140/2.1.2977.5043
- Kim, S., & McGill, A. (2011). Gaming With Mr Slot or Gaming the Slot Machine? Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 94–107. doi:10.1086/658148
- Knight, J. (2002). Safety Critical Systems: Challenges and Directions. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, 547–550. Florida: IEEE. doi:10.1145/581339.581406
- Kuderer, M., Gulati, S. & Burgard, W. (2015). Learning Driving Styles for Autonomous Vehicles from Demonstration. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE. doi:10.1109/ICRA.2015.7139555
- Lin, P. (2015). Why Ethics Matters for Autonomous Cars. In M. Maurer, J. Gerdes, B. Lenz, & H. Winner (Eds.), Autonomes Fahren, Berlin: Springer Vieweg, 69–85.
- Lindner, F. & Bentzen, M. (2018). A formalization of Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Deontic Logic and Normative Systems (pp. 211–225). Utrecht: College Publications. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.03160
- Liu, S., Stavridou, V., & Dutertre, B. (1995). The practice of formal models in safety critical systems. Journal of Systems and Software, 28, 77–87. doi:10.1016/0164-1212(94)00082-X
- Martin, M., & Schinzinger, R. (2005). Ethics in engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Menon, C. & Alexander, R. (2017). A safety-case approach to ethical considerations for autonomous vehicles. In Proceedings of the12th International Conference on System Safety and Cyber Security. London: IET. doi:10.1049/cp.2017.0174
- Menon, C. & Alexander, R. (2018). Ethics and the safety of autonomous systems. In Proceedings of the 26th Safety Critical Systems Symposium. New York: Safety Critical Systems Club
- Menon, C., Bloomfield, R. & Clements, T. (2013). Interpreting ALARP. In Proceedings of the 8th IET International System Safety Conference. London: IET. doi:10.1049/cp.2013.1712
- MIT. (2018). MIT moral machine. Retrieved from http://moralmachine.mit.edu/
- Nilsson, J. (2018). Safe self-driving cars: Challenges and some solutions. In Proceedings of the 26th Safety Critical Systems Symposium. New York: Safety Critical Systems Club
- Object Management Group. (2019) Structured assurance case metamodel (SACM), Document Number 20190314. Retrieved from https://www.omg.org/spec/SACM/2.1/Beta1/
- Office for Nuclear Regulation (2018). Guidance on the demonstration of ALARP. Retrieved from http://www.onr.org.uk/operational/tech_asst_guides/ns-tast-gd-005.pdf
- Office of Government Commerce. (2019). Prince 2, project methodology. Retrieved from https://www.prince2.com/uk/prince2-methodology
- Reyna, V. (2004). How people make decisions that involve risk: A dual process approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 60–66. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00275.x
- Royal Academy of Engineering (2017). Statement of ethical principles. Retrieved from https://www.engc.org.uk/media/2337/statement-of-ethical-principles-2014.pdf
- SAE International. (2018). J3016: Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. Retrieved from https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201401/
- Shalev-Schwartz, S., Shammah, S., & Shashua, A. (2017). On a Formal Model of Safe and Scalable Self-driving Cars, arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.06374.
- Somasundaram, J., & Diecidue, E. (2015). Regret Theory and Risk Attitudes. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 55, 147–175. doi:10.1007/s11166-017-9268-9
- The Assurance Case Working Group. (2018). Goal structuring notation community standard (version 2), Technical report scsc-141b, the safety critical systems club. Retrieved from https://scsc.uk/scsc-141B
- Thornton, S. (2018). Autonomous vehicle motion planning with ethical considerations, (Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University). Retrieved from https://ddl.stanford.edu/publications/autonomous-vehicle-motion-planning-ethical-considerations; location: Stanford
- Transport Systems Catapult. (2017) Market forecast for connected and autonomous vehicles. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/642813/15780_TSC_Market_Forecast_for_CAV_Report_FINAL.pdf
- Uber Advanced Technologies Group. (2018). Safety report: A principled approach to safety. Retrieved from https://uber.app.box.com/v/UberATGSafetyReport
- UK Autodrive. (2017a). Public attitudes survey. Retrieved from http://www.ukautodrive.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/08/Executive-Summary-FINAL.pdf
- UK Autodrive. (2017b). The moral algorithm. Retrieved from http://www.ukautodrive.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/moral algorithm white paper A4 051216.pdf.
- UK Autodrive. (2018). CAV: A hacker’s delight. http://www.ukautodrive.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Cyber security White paper A4 050917.pdf.
- UK Government (1998) Human rights act. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents
- UK Government Centre for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles. (2018). UK connected and autonomous vehicle research and development projects. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737778/ccav-research-and-development-projects.pdf
- UK Government Department for Transport. (2015). The pathway to driverless cars. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/446316/pathway-driverless-cars.pdf
- UK Government Department for Transport. (2017). The key principles of vehicle cyber security for connected and automated vehicles. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/principles-of-cyber-security-for-connected-and-automated-vehicles/the-key-principles-of-vehicle-cyber-security-for-connected-and-automated-vehicles
- UK Ministry of Defence. (2017). Defence standard 00-56: safety management requirements for defence systems, technical report 00-56 issue 7.
- Vanderelst, D., & Winfield, A. (2018). An architecture for ethical robots inspired by the simulation theory of cognition. Cognitive Systems Research, 48, 56–66. doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2017.04.002
- Venturer Cars. (2016). Introducing driverless cars to UK roads. Retrieved from https://www.venturer-cars.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/VENTURER-Trial-1-Overview.pdf
- Venturer Cars. (2017). Interactions between autonomous vehicles and other vehicles at links and junctions. Retrieved from http://www.venturer-cars.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/VENTURER-Trial-2-Technical-Reportv2.pdf
- Von Neumann, J., & Morgernstern, O. (1947). Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
- Wallach, W., & Allen, C. (2008). Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Wang, S., & Zhao, J. (2019). Risk Preference and Adoption of Autonomous Vehicles (pp. 215–229). Transportation Research A: Elsevier.
- Waymo. (2018). Safety Report: On the Road to Fully Self-Driving. Retrieved from https://storage.googleapis.com/sdc-prod/v1/safety-report/Safety%20Report%202018.pdf
- Winfield, A., Blum, C., & Liu, W. (2014). Towards an ethical robot: Internal models, consequences and ethical action selection. Advances in Autonomous Robotics Systems, 8717, 85–96. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10401-0_8
- Yoo, J., Jee, E., & Cha, S. (2009). Formal modelling and verification of safety-critical software. IEEE Software, 26, 42–49. doi:10.1109/MS.2009.67