Principles of fairness and solidarity in AI ethics regularly overlap, creating obscurity in practice: acting in accordance with one can appear indistinguishable from deciding according to the rules of the other. However, there exist irregular cases where the two concepts split, and so reveal their disparate meanings and uses. This paper explores two cases in AI medical ethics, one that is irregular and the other more conventional, to fully distinguish fairness and solidarity. Then the distinction is applied to the frequently cited COMPAS versus ProPublica dispute in judicial ethics. The application provides a broader model for settling contemporary and topical debates about fairness and solidarity. It also implies a deeper and disorienting truth about AI ethics principles and their justification.
翻译:AI道德中的公平和团结原则经常重叠,在实际中造成模糊不清:按照一项原则行事可能看起来无法区分,无法按照另一项规则作出决定;然而,存在两种概念分开的不规则案例,从而揭示了它们的不同含义和用途;本文件探讨了AI医学道德的两个案例,一个是不正常的,另一个是比较常规的,以充分区分公平和团结;然后对经常引用的COMPAS和ProPOPA在司法道德方面的争端加以区分;应用提供了一个更广泛的模式,用以解决关于公平和团结的当代辩论和专题辩论;还隐含了对AI道德原则及其理由的更深层次和混乱的真相。