1. Tae Wan Kim & Alan Scheller-Wolf. "Technological unemployment, meaning in life, purpose of business, and the future of stakeholders" (completed working paper; under review, please, email me if you want to read it: Slides). The dynamic nature of capitalism creates new jobs through technological innovation, but there is growing concern that advanced machines will master skills for newly created jobs faster than humans. Given societal concerns about the future, and given that work often confers much of life’s meaning for people, my coauthor and I explore questions about automation, meaning in life, and the purpose of future business (*This working paper recently helped consultants in KPMG write a report about automation and ethic).


2. "Toward non-intuition-based machine and artificial intelligence (AI) ethics: A deontological approach based on modal logic" (Accepted to AAAI/ACM Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Ethics and Society) (Slides are here). For this paper, I am coauthoring with John Hooker. We propose a deontological approach to machine ethics that avoids some weaknesses of an intuition-based system, such as that of Anderson and Anderson. In particular, it has no need to deal with conflicting intuitions, and it yields a more satisfactory account of when autonomy should be respected. We begin with a “dual standpoint” theory of action that regards actions as grounded in reasons and therefore as having a conditional form that is suited to machine instructions. We then derive ethical principles based on formal properties that the reasons must exhibit to be coherent, and formulate the principles using quantified modal logic. We conclude that deontology not only provides a more satisfactory basis for machine ethics but endows the machine with an ability to explain its actions, thus contributing to transparency in AI.

3. Tae Wan Kim & Alan Strudler, "Team Production, opportunism, and governance: A Confucian approach" (completed working paper; under review. Please email me if you want to read it). Various researchers suggest authority as a solution to the team production problem (shirking and wasteful rent-seeking). The existing theories commonly use a market-based understanding of authority, but the model has limitations in understanding the nature of authority in team contexts. We develop a Confucian role-obligation-based model of authority. In short, we argue for a team production theory of the firm to be more deeply team-based.