fEDM+: A Risk-Based Fuzzy Ethical Decision Making Framework with Principle-Level Explainability and Pluralistic Validation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.21746v2
• Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2026 07:03:35 GMT
• Title: fEDM+: A Risk-Based Fuzzy Ethical Decision Making Framework with Principle-Level Explainability and Pluralistic Validation
• Authors: Abeer Dyoub, Francesca A. Lisi,
• Abstract summary: We introduce an Explainability and Traceability Module (ETM) that explicitly links each ethical decision rule to the underlying moral principles.<n>We replace single-referent validation with a pluralistic semantic validation framework.<n>The resulting extended fEDM, called fEDM+, preserves formal verifiability while achieving enhanced interpretability and stakeholder-aware validation.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: In a previous work, we introduced the fuzzy Ethical Decision-Making framework (fEDM), a risk-based ethical reasoning architecture grounded in fuzzy logic. The original model combined a fuzzy Ethical Risk Assessment module (fERA) with ethical decision rules, enabled formal structural verification through Fuzzy Petri Nets (FPNs), and validated outputs against a single normative referent. Although this approach ensured formal soundness and decision consistency, it did not fully address two critical challenges: principled explainability of decisions and robustness under ethical pluralism. In this paper, we extend fEDM in two major directions. First, we introduce an Explainability and Traceability Module (ETM) that explicitly links each ethical decision rule to the underlying moral principles and computes a weighted principle-contribution profile for every recommended action. This enables transparent, auditable explanations that expose not only what decision was made but why, and on the basis of which principles. Second, we replace single-referent validation with a pluralistic semantic validation framework that evaluates decisions against multiple stakeholder referents, each encoding distinct principle priorities and risk tolerances. This shift allows principled disagreement to be formally represented rather than suppressed, thus increasing robustness and contextual sensitivity. The resulting extended fEDM, called fEDM+, preserves formal verifiability while achieving enhanced interpretability and stakeholder-aware validation, making it suitable as an oversight and governance layer for ethically sensitive AI systems.

Related papers

• Mirror: A Multi-Agent System for AI-Assisted Ethics Review [104.3684024153469]
  Mirror is an agentic framework for AI-assisted ethical review.<n>It integrates ethical reasoning, structured rule interpretation, and multi-agent deliberation within a unified architecture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-09T03:38:55Z)
• Breaking Up with Normatively Monolithic Agency with GRACE: A Reason-Based Neuro-Symbolic Architecture for Safe and Ethical AI Alignment [7.776436480034601]
  We introduce a neuro-symbolic reason-based containment architecture, Governor for Reason-Aligned ContainmEnt (GRACE)<n>GRACE decouples normative reasoning from instrumental decision-making and can contain AI agents of virtually any design.<n>The MM uses a reason-based formalism providing a semantic foundation for deontic logic, enabling interpretability, contestability, and justifiability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-15T15:47:38Z)
• Fuzzy Representation of Norms [1.0098114696565863]
  This paper proposes a logical representation of SLEEC rules and presents a methodology to embed these ethical requirements using test-score semantics and fuzzy logic.<n>The use of fuzzy logic is motivated by the view of ethics as a domain of possibilities, which allows the resolution of ethical dilemmas that AI systems may encounter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-06T12:51:18Z)
• The Reasoning-Creativity Trade-off: Toward Creativity-Driven Problem Solving [57.652356955571065]
  State-of-the-art large language model (LLM) pipelines rely on bootstrapped reasoning loops.<n>We analyze how this design choice is sensitive to the collapse of the model's distribution over reasoning paths.<n>We introduce Distributional Creative Reasoning (DCR), a unified variational objective that casts training as gradient flow through probability measures on solution traces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-02T17:10:31Z)
• Syntactic Framing Fragility: An Audit of Robustness in LLM Ethical Decisions [1.0671844383558033]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in consequential decision-making settings.<n>We study whether LLMs maintain consistent ethical judgments across logically equivalent but syntactically different prompts.<n>We introduce Syntactic Framing Fragility (SFF), a robustness evaluation framework that isolates purely syntactic effects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-27T18:09:34Z)
• The Principle of Proportional Duty: A Knowledge-Duty Framework for Ethical Equilibrium in Human and Artificial Systems [0.0]
  This paper introduces the Principle of Proportional Duty (PPD), a novel framework that models how ethical responsibility scales with an agent's epistemic state.<n>As uncertainty increases, Action Duty (the duty to act decisively) is proportionally converted into Repair Duty (the active duty to verify, inquire, and resolve uncertainty).<n>This paper applies the framework across four domains, clinical ethics, recipient-rights law, economic governance, and artificial intelligence, to demonstrate its cross-disciplinary validity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T02:37:07Z)
• FaithCoT-Bench: Benchmarking Instance-Level Faithfulness of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [62.452350134196934]
  FaithCoT-Bench is a unified benchmark for instance-level CoT unfaithfulness detection.<n>Our framework formulates unfaithfulness detection as a discriminative decision problem.<n>FaithCoT-Bench sets a solid basis for future research toward more interpretable and trustworthy reasoning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-05T05:16:54Z)
• The Convergent Ethics of AI? Analyzing Moral Foundation Priorities in Large Language Models with a Multi-Framework Approach [6.0972634521845475]
  This paper introduces the Priorities in Reasoning and Intrinsic Moral Evaluation (PRIME) framework.<n>PRIME is a comprehensive methodology for analyzing moral priorities across foundational ethical dimensions.<n>We apply this framework to six leading large language models (LLMs) through a dual-protocol approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-27T14:26:48Z)
• Prioritization First, Principles Second: An Adaptive Interpretation of Helpful, Honest, and Harmless Principles [30.405680322319242]
  The Helpful, Honest, and Harmless (HHH) principle is a framework for aligning AI systems with human values.<n>We argue for an adaptive interpretation of the HHH principle and propose a reference framework for its adaptation to diverse scenarios.<n>This work offers practical insights for improving AI alignment, ensuring that HHH principles remain both grounded and operationally effective in real-world AI deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-09T22:41:24Z)
• Deliberative Alignment: Reasoning Enables Safer Language Models [64.60765108418062]
  We introduce Deliberative Alignment, a new paradigm that teaches the model safety specifications and trains it to explicitly recall and accurately reason over the specifications before answering.<n>We used this approach to align OpenAI's o-series models, and achieved highly precise adherence to OpenAI's safety policies, without requiring human-written chain-of-thoughts or answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T21:00:11Z)
• A Semantic Approach to Decidability in Epistemic Planning (Extended Version) [72.77805489645604]
  We use a novel semantic approach to achieve decidability. Specifically, we augment the logic of knowledge S5$_n$ and with an interaction axiom called (knowledge) commutativity. We prove that our framework admits a finitary non-fixpoint characterization of common knowledge, which is of independent interest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-28T11:26:26Z)
• Logical Satisfiability of Counterfactuals for Faithful Explanations in NLI [60.142926537264714]
  We introduce the methodology of Faithfulness-through-Counterfactuals. It generates a counterfactual hypothesis based on the logical predicates expressed in the explanation. It then evaluates if the model's prediction on the counterfactual is consistent with that expressed logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T03:40:59Z)

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.