The Human Side of Artificial Intelligence

Science and Engineering Ethics - Artificial moral agents raise complex ethical questions both in terms of the potential decisions they may make as well as the inputs that create their cognitive...     

人体生物医学研究中受试者权益保护对策

在人体生物医学研究日益发达的今天,受试者权益保护问题逐渐浮出水面。目前我国对受试者的保护主要依赖于知情同意书和伦理委员会,关于受试者权益保护的规范性文件存在层级低、不系统和不完整等问题。建立专门的受试者保护法,完善受试者权益保护相关制度迫在眉睫。研究认为,制定专门的人体生物医学研究受试者权益保护法律,完善伦理委员会制度,推行强制保险以及救济金制度,建立严格的责任体系、开展积极的社会教育是受试者权益保护的基本对策。     

负责任创新中医疗人工智能应用技术的伦理审视

负责任创新是目前探讨人工智能技术在医疗领域应用的重要理论,也是引导医疗人工智能应用技术向善发展的理想图景,其基本结构主要包括预测、反思、协商、反应四个维度。当前,医疗人工智能应用技术受技术“黑箱特质”的影响,暴露了其在安全、隐私、道德、分配等方面的伦理风险,桎梏了其应用于医疗事业的广阔前景。面对医疗人工智能应用技术的伦理困境,从其技术研发、设计、应用、跟踪等全过程分析嵌入负责任创新四维度模型,能够有效缓解医疗人工智能应用技术在实践中存在的伦理风险,从而真正实现其为人类健康的精准赋能。

     

试论临床试验受试者的权利保护机制——以程序规则为视角

临床试验受试者,作为公益的施行人,对其权利进行保护已迫在眉睫.但依据现行的规定,保障受试者权益主要措施--伦理委员会与签署知情同意书,在操作层面上均遭遇程序壁垒.从现行法律规定的弊端入手,健全知情同意权和伦理委员会构成程序性制度及规则,弥补立法缺陷.     

谈谈中国临床试验研究中受试者权益保障问题

随着国家《药品临床试验管理规范》的颁布与实施,我国新药临床试验研究水平有相当的提高,但也存在着一些问题。其中包括保护受试者权益问题。国家GCP有关章节中明确指出要保护受试者权益。并有具体规定,但在执行中尚有出入,如试验方案未经伦理委员会批准,未向受试者告知试验内容。或告知的不够充分,甚至在未签署知情同意书时就开始试验等。为此,我国采取了相应的措施,如设立药品临床研究培训中心;定期对临床试验基地的研究者以及相关人员如与试验有关的医师,药师及申办者进行GCP培训,基地审核制度,以法律手段来保证受试者权益等。     

The Second Essential Tension: on Tradition and Innovation in Interdisciplinary Research

In his analysis of “the essential tension between tradition and innovation” Thomas S. Kuhn focused on the apparent paradox that, on the one hand, normal research is a highly convergent activity based upon a settled consensus, but, on the other hand, the ultimate effect of this tradition-bound work has invariably been to change the tradition. Kuhn argued that, on the one hand, without the possibility of divergent thought, fundamental innovation would be precluded. On the other hand, without a strong emphasis on convergent thought, science would become a mess created by continuous theory changes and scientific progress would again be precluded. On Kuhn’s view, both convergent and divergent thought are therefore equally necessary for the progress of science. In this paper, I shall argue that a similar fundamental tension exists between the demands we see for novel insights of an interdisciplinary nature and the need for established intellectual doctrines founded in the classical disciplines. First, I shall revisit Kuhn’s analysis of the essential tension between tradition and innovation. Next, I shall argue that the tension inherent in interdisciplinary research between, on the one hand, intellectual independence and critical scrutiny and, on the other hand, epistemic dependence and trust is a complement to Kuhn’s essential tension within mono-disciplinary science between convergent and divergent thought.     

Regulating Human Participants Protection in Medical Research and the Accreditation of Medical Research Ethics Committees in the Netherlands

The review system on research with human participants in the Netherlands is characterised as a decentralised controlled and integrated peer review system. It consists of an independent governmental body, the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (or Central Committee), which regulates the review of research proposals by accredited Medical Research Ethics Committees (MRECs). The legal basis was founded in 1999 with the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act. The review system is a decentralised arrangement since most research proposal are reviewed by the 30 accredited MRECs in the country. It is a controlled system in which the Central Committee is responsible for the accreditation and oversight of the MRECs and can make legally binding directives for these committees. The assessment of research proposals is an integrated peer review process in which all documents of the research file are reviewed by experts in one committee only. A small number of research proposals are assessed by the Central Committee and not by accredited MRECs. These proposals are on specific research categories such as gene therapy, cell therapy and embryo research. The review of research with surplus human embryos is regulated separately in the Embryos Act. The Central Committee provides support to the accredited MRECs and to researchers and sponsors. It is currently developing an internet portal to reduce the bureaucracy and make the review process more efficient and transparent. The Central Committee stimulates confidence on medical research in society by providing a public trial registry with core data on reviewed research proposals.     

The Perplexing Conclusion: The Essential Difference between Natural and Artificial Intelligence is Human Beings' Ability to Deceive

As opposed to the computer, the human being can intentionally mislead in many different ways, can behave chaotically, and whenever he has the motivation can choose also by improvisation, non-consequent misleading, and spontaneous manners of reasoning and articulation. Human perception and the elaboration of the experience are existentially interest-related, and distorted if found necessary. The arbitrariness is unlimited; human beings can initiate and produce absurd combinations, contextual failures and deceptive expressions, and do so also by intonation and body-language. These are the sources of social behaviour, of literature, arts, jurisprudence, politics, etc., all representing systems of meaning constructed by human beings, present in their 'Lebenswelt'. Human beings are flexible, sensible of emotions and well-trained to code and decode hidden fallacies, to produce wild associations, capricious-temporary conclusions, tasks that the rigid computer cannot fulfil. They can choose incorrect and dysfunctional answers; the exactness of their reasoning can be logically invalid. The computer has only inner horizons; human beings have also outer ones, in which they are able to produce multidimensional relationships. They are not truth-conditioned.
The reduction of organic human thinking to the computer's mechanisms can end up in humankind's dehumanisation.     

肿瘤药品临床试验中的知情同意

肿瘤学的发展一直伴随抗肿瘤新药的研发与临床试验.获取受试者的知情同意是完成临床试验过程中最重要的一步.如何顺利而有效地获取知情同意并保护其合法权益不受侵犯成为研究者最为关注的话题.本文就如何解决这一过程中存在的问题进行了初步探讨.     

Learning to Manipulate and Categorize in Human and Artificial Agents

This study investigates the acquisition of integrated object manipulation and categorization abilities through a series of experiments in which human adults and artificial agents were asked to learn to manipulate two‐dimensional objects that varied in shape, color, weight, and color intensity. The analysis of the obtained results and the comparison of the behavior displayed by human and artificial agents allowed us to identify the key role played by features affecting the agent/environment interaction, the relation between category and action development, and the role of cognitive biases originating from previous knowledge.