Passenger Safety vs. Third-Party Harm Minimization Algorithm Conflict
Individual
91238621
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/165#Passenger_Safety_vs._Third-Party_Harm_Minimization_Algorithm_Conflict
Properties
Parent
Client-Interestvs.Third-PartySafetyAlgorithmicPre-CommitmentState
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Client-Interestvs.Third-PartySafetyAlgorithmicPre-CommitmentState
Activeperiod
From identification of the binary algorithm choice through submission of the risk assessment recommendation
Affectedparties
Automobile manufacturer
Cyclists
Engineer A
Motorcycle riders
Pedestrians
Vehicle passengers
Concept Category
State
Confidence
0.91
Importance
high
Stateclass
Client-Interest vs. Third-Party Safety Algorithmic Pre-Commitment State
Subject
Structural conflict between automobile manufacturer's commercial interest in passenger-protective algorithms and Engineer A's obligation to minimize aggregate public harm
Terminatedby
Recommendation submitted; client adopts a harm-allocation standard; or Engineer A withdraws from engagement
Triggeringevent
Risk assessment team presented with binary choice between passenger-protective algorithm and harm-minimizing algorithm for unavoidable crash scenarios
Urgencylevel
high
Source Evidence
Source Text
does the vehicle's system choose the outcome that will likely result in the greatest potential for safety for the vehicle's passengers or does the vehicle's software system instead choose an option in which the least amount of potential harm is done to any of those involved in an accident
Text References
does the vehicle's system choose the outcome that will likely result in the greatest potential for safety for the vehicle's passengers or does the vehicle's software system instead choose an option in which the least amount of potential harm is done to any of those involved in an accident
having the car crash into a stationary object (e.g., telephone pole, etc.) with the probability of causing some passengers serious but non-life-threatening injuries instead of striking and potentially causing a fatal injury to a pedestrian, cyclist, or motorcycle rider
TTL
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proethica_case_165: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/165> .
<http://proethica.org/ontology/case/165#Passenger_Safety_vs._Third-Party_Harm_Minimization_Algorithm_Conflict> a owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Passenger Safety vs. Third-Party Harm Minimization Algorithm Conflict" ;
rdfs:subClassOf <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#Client-Interestvs.Third-PartySafetyAlgorithmicPre-CommitmentState> .
Metadata
Ontology
Type
Individual
Content Hash
912386214fb6119a...Last Updated
2026-03-08 16:29
Extraction Provenance
Discovered in Case
165
Discovered in Pass
1
Discovered in Section
facts
First Discovered
2026-02-27T23:23:14.080776+00:00
First Case
165
Generated
2026-02-27T23:23:14.080776+00:00
Attributed To
Case 165 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-27T23:40:57.911375
Generated By
ProEthica Case 165 Extraction