Tate McGregor

Personal autonomous vehicles can sense their surrounding environment, plan their route, and drive with little or no involvement of human drivers. Despite the latest technological advancements and the hopeful announcements made by leading entrepreneurs, to date no personal vehicle is approved for road circulation in a “fully” or “semi” autonomous mode (autonomy levels 4 and 5) and it is still unclear when such vehicles will be mature enough to receive this kind of approval. The present multi-disciplinary review investigates the major challenges faced by the automative sector and identify the problems that delay the commercialization of autonomous vehicles, examining the limitations and risks associated with current technologies and discussing the most promising solutions devised by the researchers. This negative assessment is not motivated by pessimism, but by the aspiration to raise critical awareness about the technology's state-of-the-art, the industry's quality standards, and the society's demands and expectations. The review aims to offer an enlarged picture that links the purely technological aspects (like artificial intelligence for perception and navigation) with the relevant theoretical, methodological, and human-centric dimensions, including design preferences, socio-cultural attitudes, conceptual assumptions, and normative frameworks. Our analysis suggests that considering the broader context, adopting an integrative and culturally aware approach, is key to illuminate structural problems and identify holistic solutions. We conclude that, due to the systemic, cross-disciplinary, and highly interrelated character of these problems, continued research and development efforts in the medium-long term will be necessary to safely deploy levels 4 and 5 personal autonomous vehicles.

This article discusses the nascent idea of artificial wisdom. It intends to improve philosophical understanding of artificial wisdom as conceived across the literature today. Scholars – from technologists and engineers to philosophers and psychologists – have deliberated on what wisdom might mean in an artificial sense. There is a diversity to these attempts to define artificial wisdom. As such, the field is in great need of some conceptual clarity. This paper aims to be a first step in that effort. We discuss how those in the field generally agree that characteristics of artificial wisdom include empathy, creativity, adaptability, self-awareness, sociability, communication, and constant learning. Scholars differ, however, on several points including the extent to which artificial wisdom involves human-artificial teaming, its ultimate goal, and its relationship to artificial general intelligence (AGI) and artificial consciousness. This article highlights where scholars in the field have made assumptions, failed to account for the related work of their peers, and missed some of the bigger philosophical questions at play.