AI, Pluralism, and (Social) Compensation
Abstract
One strategy in response to pluralistic values in a user population is to personalize an AI system: if the AI can adapt to the specific values of each individual, then we can potentially avoid many of the challenges of pluralism. Unfortunately, this approach creates a significant ethical issue: if there is an external measure of success for the human-AI team, then the adaptive AI system may develop strategies (sometimes deceptive) to compensate for its human teammate. This phenomenon can be viewed as a form of social compensation, where the AI makes decisions based not on predefined goals but on its human partner's deficiencies in relation to the team's performance objectives. We provide a practical ethical analysis of the conditions in which such compensation may nonetheless be justifiable.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2404.19256,
title = {AI, Pluralism, and (Social) Compensation},
author = {Nandhini Swaminathan and David Danks},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.19256},
year = {2024}
}
Comments
10 pages