A Causal Analysis of Harm

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.05327v1
• Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 10:36:24 GMT
• Title: A Causal Analysis of Harm
• Authors: Sander Beckers, Hana Chockler, Joseph Y. Halpern
• Abstract summary: There is a growing need for a legal and regulatory framework to address when and how autonomous systems harm someone. This paper formally defines a qualitative notion of harm that uses causal models and is based on a well-known definition of actual causality. We show that our definition is able to handle the examples from the literature, and illustrate its importance for reasoning about situations involving autonomous systems.
• Score: 18.7822411439221
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As autonomous systems rapidly become ubiquitous, there is a growing need for a legal and regulatory framework to address when and how such a system harms someone. There have been several attempts within the philosophy literature to define harm, but none of them has proven capable of dealing with with the many examples that have been presented, leading some to suggest that the notion of harm should be abandoned and "replaced by more well-behaved notions". As harm is generally something that is caused, most of these definitions have involved causality at some level. Yet surprisingly, none of them makes use of causal models and the definitions of actual causality that they can express. In this paper we formally define a qualitative notion of harm that uses causal models and is based on a well-known definition of actual causality (Halpern, 2016). The key novelty of our definition is that it is based on contrastive causation and uses a default utility to which the utility of actual outcomes is compared. We show that our definition is able to handle the examples from the literature, and illustrate its importance for reasoning about situations involving autonomous systems.

Related papers

• The Odyssey of Commonsense Causality: From Foundational Benchmarks to Cutting-Edge Reasoning [70.16523526957162]
  Understanding commonsense causality helps people understand the principles of the real world better. Despite its significance, a systematic exploration of this topic is notably lacking. Our work aims to provide a systematic overview, update scholars on recent advancements, and provide a pragmatic guide for beginners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T16:30:50Z)
• CELLO: Causal Evaluation of Large Vision-Language Models [9.928321287432365]
  Causal reasoning is fundamental to human intelligence and crucial for effective decision-making in real-world environments. We introduce a fine-grained and unified definition of causality involving interactions between humans and objects. We construct a novel dataset, CELLO, consisting of 14,094 causal questions across all four levels of causality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T12:34:52Z)
• Phenomenological Causality [14.817342045377842]
  We propose a notion of 'phenomenological causality' whose basic concept is a set of elementary actions. We argue that it is consistent with the causal Markov condition when the system under consideration interacts with other variables that control the elementary actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-15T13:05:45Z)
• A Quantitative Account of Harm [18.7822411439221]
  We first present a quantitative definition of harm in a deterministic context involving a single individual. We then consider the issues involved in dealing with uncertainty regarding the context. We show that the "obvious" way of doing this can lead to counterintuitive or inappropriate answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-29T21:48:38Z)
• Active Bayesian Causal Inference [72.70593653185078]
  We propose Active Bayesian Causal Inference (ABCI), a fully-Bayesian active learning framework for integrated causal discovery and reasoning. ABCI jointly infers a posterior over causal models and queries of interest. We show that our approach is more data-efficient than several baselines that only focus on learning the full causal graph.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-04T22:38:57Z)
• Causal influence in operational probabilistic theories [0.0]
  We study the relation of causal influence between input systems of a reversible evolution and its output systems. One is the notion based on signalling, the other is the notion used to define the neighbourhood of a cell in a quantum cellular automaton.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-30T16:10:57Z)
• The Counterfactual NESS Definition of Causation [3.198144010381572]
  I show that our definition is in fact a formalization of Wright's famous NESS definition of causation combined with a counterfactual difference-making condition. I modify our definition to offer a substantial improvement: I weaken the difference-making condition in such a way that it avoids the problematic analysis of cases of preemption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-09T15:57:56Z)
• Causal Expectation-Maximisation [70.45873402967297]
  We show that causal inference is NP-hard even in models characterised by polytree-shaped graphs. We introduce the causal EM algorithm to reconstruct the uncertainty about the latent variables from data about categorical manifest variables. We argue that there appears to be an unnoticed limitation to the trending idea that counterfactual bounds can often be computed without knowledge of the structural equations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-04T10:25:13Z)
• Thinking About Causation: A Causal Language with Epistemic Operators [58.720142291102135]
  We extend the notion of a causal model with a representation of the state of an agent. On the side of the object language, we add operators to express knowledge and the act of observing new information. We provide a sound and complete axiomatization of the logic, and discuss the relation of this framework to causal team semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-30T12:16:45Z)
• From Checking to Inference: Actual Causality Computations as Optimization Problems [79.87179017975235]
  We present a novel approach to formulate different notions of causal reasoning, over binary acyclic models, as optimization problems. We show that both notions are efficiently automated. Using models with more than $8000$ variables, checking is computed in a matter of seconds, with MaxSAT outperforming ILP in many cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-05T10:56:52Z)
• Aligning Faithful Interpretations with their Social Attribution [58.13152510843004]
  We find that the requirement of model interpretations to be faithful is vague and incomplete. We identify that the problem is a misalignment between the causal chain of decisions (causal attribution) and the attribution of human behavior to the interpretation (social attribution)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-01T16:45:38Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.