A Computational Ethical Framework for Financial Digital Phenotyping for Mental Health

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.24275v1
• Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 11:19:52 GMT
• Title: A Computational Ethical Framework for Financial Digital Phenotyping for Mental Health
• Abstract summary: We propose a computational ethical framework for AI-driven digital phenotyping system.<n>We model key ethical properties and verify them using the Z3 Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solver.<n>This presents early research enabling continuous, machine-verifiable ethical checking.
• Score: 2.3101913925246045
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Ethical governance of AI-driven systems is often expressed through high-level principles and static documentation, creating a gap between regulatory requirements and system-level verification. This challenge is particularly acute in digital phenotyping, where continuous behavioural data raises concerns around consent, privacy, and fairness. In this paper, we propose a computational ethical framework for AI-driven digital phenotyping system in which ethical requirements are formalised as deontic temporal logic constraints, alongside a conceptual ethical agent that oversees the system and ensures that any supervised system satisfies the specified constraints. Using a case study involving financial data and mental health, we model key ethical properties and verify them using the Z3 Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solver. Our evaluation shows that the framework is logically consistent and that violations of the specified ethical properties are ruled out within the formal model through counterexample-based verification. This presents early research enabling continuous, machine-verifiable ethical checking, moving beyond retrospective compliance based on static documentation. We discuss limitations, including the need for real-world verification with data, the challenge with subjectivity and contextual sensitivity, the need for human oversight, and outline how such approaches can support the development of digital phenotyping and AI systems with continuous and auditable ethical guarantees.

Related papers

• Validity, Reliability, and Transparency in Artificial Intelligence Regulation [2.588958866512272]
  Article argues that modern AI raises concerns of construct validity, confounding, representativeness, distribution shift, and fairness trade-offs.<n>We argue that inference should function as a precondition for proportionality assessment and deployment approval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-06T09:36:15Z)
• Behaviorally Adaptive Visual Diversion for Inclusive and Resilient Digital Assessment Delivery [0.0]
  This paper introduces Behaviorally-Adaptive Visual Diversion (BAVD), a theoretical framework in which a synthetic, non-semantic visual field is composited with assessment content.<n>BAVD incorporates an accessibility-aware mechanism that reduces or suppresses diversion intensity for candidates with approved visual-processing accommodations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T12:13:25Z)
• Large Language Models as a Semantic Interface and Ethical Mediator in Neuro-Digital Ecosystems: Conceptual Foundations and a Regulatory Imperative [83.99688944263843]
  This article introduces and substantiates the concept of Neuro-Linguistic Integration (NLI)<n>It is a novel paradigm for human-technology interaction where Large Language Models act as a key semantic interface between raw neural data and their social application.<n>We argue for the development of a second-order neuroethics,' focused not merely on neural data protection but on the ethics of AI-mediated semantic interpretation itself.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-18T07:34:17Z)
• A Survey of Reasoning in Autonomous Driving Systems: Open Challenges and Emerging Paradigms [49.66022971508878]
  We argue that reasoning should be elevated from a modular component to the system's cognitive core.<n>We derive and systematize seven core reasoning challenges, such as the responsiveness-reasoning trade-off and social-game reasoning.<n>We identify a fundamental and unresolved tension between the high-latency, deliberative nature of LLM-based reasoning and the millisecond-scale, safety-critical demands of vehicle control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T07:40:53Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Rethinking Data Protection in the (Generative) Artificial Intelligence Era [138.07763415496288]
  We propose a four-level taxonomy that captures the diverse protection needs arising in modern (generative) AI models and systems.<n>Our framework offers a structured understanding of the trade-offs between data utility and control, spanning the entire AI pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T02:45:51Z)
• Ethical AI: Towards Defining a Collective Evaluation Framework [0.3413711585591077]
  Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming sectors such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous systems.<n>Yet its rapid integration raises urgent ethical concerns related to data ownership, privacy, and systemic bias.<n>This article proposes a modular ethical assessment framework built on ontological blocks of meaning-discrete, interpretable units.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T21:10:47Z)
• Deontic Temporal Logic for Formal Verification of AI Ethics [4.028503203417233]
  This paper proposes a formalization based on deontic logic to define and evaluate the ethical behavior of AI systems.<n>It introduces axioms and theorems to capture ethical requirements related to fairness and explainability.<n>The authors evaluate the effectiveness of this formalization by assessing the ethics of the real-world COMPAS and loan prediction AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-10T07:48:40Z)
• Neural Causal Models for Counterfactual Identification and Estimation [62.30444687707919]
  We study the evaluation of counterfactual statements through neural models. First, we show that neural causal models (NCMs) are expressive enough. Second, we develop an algorithm for simultaneously identifying and estimating counterfactual distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T18:29:09Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
  Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome. Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations. We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z)

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.