Applying Game Theory on Smartphones

Capturing Contextual Morality: Applying Game Theory on Smartphones Niels van Berkel Simo Hosio [email protected] [email protected] University College London University of Oulu London, United Kingdom Oulu, Finland Benjamin Tag Jorge Goncalves [email protected] [email protected] The University of Melbourne The University of Melbourne Melbourne, Australia Melbourne, Australia ABSTRACT and the 2019 International Symposium on Wearable Computers (Ubi- In order to build more fair Artificial Intelligence applications, Comp/ISWC ’19 Adjunct), September 9–13, 2019, London, United King- a thorough understanding of human morality is required. dom. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3341162.3344846 Given the variable nature of human moral values, AI algorithms will have to adjust their behaviour based on the moral values of its users in order to align with end user expectations. 1 INTRODUCTION Quantifying human moral values is, however, a challenging The increasingly widespread deployment of Artificial Intel- task which cannot easily be completed using e.g. surveys. In ligence (AI) in our daily lives has raised concerns regard- order to address this problem, we propose the use of game ing the fairness, accountability, and transparency of these theory in longitudinal mobile sensing deployments. Game high-stake algorithms. Identified negative consequences of theory has long been used in disciplines such as Econom- automated decision making (e.g., racism, sexism [24]) have ics to quantify human preferences by asking participants to uncovered a gap between AI algorithms and the surrounding choose between a set of hypothetical options and outcomes. society’s moral values. Indeed, initial work within HCI and The behaviour observed in these games, combined with the other disciplines have started to direct focus on improving use of mobile sensors, enables researchers to obtain unique the fairness as well as transparency of these systems, and an insights into the effect of context on participant convictions. interesting consideration of these algorithms is their connec- KEYWORDS tion, or lack thereof, to the actual moral values and beliefs which drive human decision making [8]. These values are Mobile sensing; context; moral; ethics; artificial intelligence; contextual: previous work clearly indicates differences in game theory. moral values and decisions between people, cultures, and ACM Reference Format: contexts [9]. Therefore, it is critical that future AI systems Niels van Berkel, Simo Hosio, Benjamin Tag, and Jorge Goncalves. are trained on a contextually rich dataset and/or tailored to 2019. Capturing Contextual Morality: Applying Game Theory on a specific context [12]. This knowledge, which we call con- Smartphones. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Interna- textual morality, is critical in ensuring that AI systems meet tional Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing set design goals as well as the requirements of people in an increasingly complex interplay of technology and society. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for Obtaining insightful measurements on the (contextual) personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies morality of people is, however, not straightforward. Previous are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights work investigating human morality has focused on the com- for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must pletion of surveys in the lab or online, often using stimuli be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or to trigger a specific context [11, 14]. In this work, we ex- republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific plore the potential of game theory in collecting longitudinal permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]. insights about human morality. Game theory models inter- UbiComp/ISWC ’19 Adjunct, September 9–13, 2019, London, United Kingdom active scenarios in which participants are offered a choice © 2019 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM. between two (or more) options and their respective reward. ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-6869-8/19/09...$15.00 An essential element of game theory scenarios is the fact https://doi.org/10.1145/3341162.3344846 that the reward (or punishment) of the game is dependent on UbiComp/ISWC ’19 Adjunct, September 9–13, 2019, London, United Kingdom van Berkel et al. Table 1: Outcomes for Player A and Player B in the Prisoner’s Dilemma Player B cooperates (stays silent) Player B defects (betrays Player A) Player A cooperates Player A serves 1 year in prison. Player A serves 3 years in prison. (stays silent) Player B serves 1 year in prison. Player B goes free. Player A defects Player A goes free. Player A serves 2 years in prison. (betrays Player B) Player B serves 3 years in prison. Player B serves 2 years in prison. the strategy of both players. As such, combining the applica- made by autonomous vehicles [1]. In an online crowdsourc- tion of smartphone-based game theory with mobile sensing ing study, participants were asked to indicate their preference allows researchers to obtain rich insights into the effects of for the car’s collision avoidance, and subsequent potential context on the participant’s strategies and convictions. casualty of the passengers, as based on the characteristics of In this work we explore the possibilities of employing pedestrians in front of the car (e.g., elderly, children). Results game theory to collect longitudinal insights into contextual from these human evaluations can offer insights and guid- morality. To assist in the quantification of morality, we follow ance for the implementation of both algorithms and policy. an Utilitarian perspective (as opposed to e.g. a Deontological Although the authors identified differences in moral decision- perspective). Utilitarianism states that ethical decision mak- making between cultures (e.g., Southern cultures showed a ing maximises value (i.e., ‘utility’ – sometimes labelled as strong preference to save younger people over older people, ‘happiness’) during decision making [20]. Following this per- whereas this difference is much less pronounced in Eastern spective, a contextually moral decision can thus be defined cultures) [1], no additional elements of context were consid- as the decision which maximises utility in a given context. ered in their analysis. Subsequently, the study of contextual morality aims to sys- tematically explore the effect of context on our moral values. As the use of game theory forces participants to make a Game theory choice (i.e. to ‘pick a side’), appropriate use of game theory Game theory models the strategic decision making between can identify how context affects participant decision making two or more players by providing a pre-set number of op- while maintaining identical game scenarios. Furthermore, tions and outcomes between which players are asked to we also identify challenges that researchers must overcome make a choice. Given the ability of game theory to quantify when running studies applying game theory. Our long-term human preferences while simultaneously offering versatility goal is to apply game theory to identify user’s expectations to adjust game scenarios, it has become a popular research of the behaviour of AI applications in various day-to-day instrument in Economics [7]. Arguably the most famous scenarios. Following the discussion of opportunities and chal- game theory example is the ‘Prisoner’s Dilemma’. Shown lenges facing the deployment of in-the-wild game theory in Table 1, the Prisoner’s Dilemma highlights the fact that studies, we also outline opportunities for future work in this players can act either as rivals or partners, and that both area. players operate under uncertainty (i.e., what will the other player choose). An important concept in game theory is the Nash Equilibrium – a situation in which all of a game’s play- 2 RELATED WORK ers pursue the best possible strategy given the strategies of Contextual morality all other players. A commonly used interpretation of this is the ‘no regret’ interpretation; “there is no player who, after Research in the field of Psychology has revealed consider- observing the opponent’s choice, regrets his own choice” [7]. able differences in human morality following changes in their context. For example, Leavitt et al. asked participants to assume a professional identity (e.g., manager versus engi- Game theory in HCI. Smartphones are highly suitable devices neer) and observed substantial influences on the participants’ to be used for data collection activities due to the variety moral judgement [17]. Similarly, the (social) presence of oth- of onboard sensors as well as their interactive capabilities. ers has been extensively studied and shown to affect our With smartphones, different types of auctions [19] have been moral preferences [9]. popular to collect data. For instance, in a 2-week long field In an ongoing attempt to better understand the expected trial, Hosio et al. leveraged a reverse second price auction to behaviour of AI-systems, researchers have explored human collect contextual data using mobile sensing as well as sub- morality in decision making. An example of this is provided jective insights on the monetary value of remaining battery by Awad et al., who study the moral implications of decisions life in a real life context [13]. Capturing Contextual Morality: Applying Game Theory on Smartphones UbiComp/ISWC ’19 Adjunct, September 9–13, 2019, London, United Kingdom 3 OPPORTUNITIES Auction is a promising approach due to the always-on nature The related work typically relies on the use of surveys to ob- of smartphones and the capacity of auctions to elicit truthful tain insights in human morality [9, 17], and has presented a information [19] – something that can arguably be difficult number of validated scales to do so.

Load more