Ethical awareness is critical for robots operating in human environments, yet existing automated planning tools provide little support. Manually specifying ethical rules is labour-intensive and highly context-specific. We present Princi-ples2Plan, an interactive research prototype demonstrating how a human and a Large Language Model (LLM) can collaborate to produce context-sensitive ethical rules and guide automated planning. A domain expert provides the planning domain, problem details, and relevant high-level principles such as beneficence and privacy. The system generates op-erationalisable ethical rules consistent with these principles, which the user can review, prioritise, and supply to a planner to produce ethically-informed plans. To our knowledge, no prior system supports users in generating principle-grounded rules for classical planning contexts. Principles2Plan showcases the potential of human-LLM collaboration for making ethical automated planning more practical and feasible.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) are revolutionizing today's business practices; however, their adoption within small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) raises serious trust, ethical, and technical issues. In this perspective paper, we introduce a structured, multi-phased framework, "SME-TEAM" for the secure and responsible use of these technologies in SMEs. Based on a conceptual structure of four key pillars, i.e., Data, Algorithms, Human Oversight, and Model Architecture, SME-TEAM bridges theoretical ethical principles with operational practice, enhancing AI capabilities across a wide range of applications in SMEs. Ultimately, this paper provides a structured roadmap for the adoption of these emerging technologies, positioning trust and ethics as a driving force for resilience, competitiveness, and sustainable innovation within the area of business analytics and SMEs.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology epitomizes the complex challenges posed by human-made artifacts, particularly those widely integrated into society and exerting significant influence, highlighting potential benefits and their negative consequences. While other technologies may also pose substantial risks, AI's pervasive reach makes its societal effects especially profound. The complexity of AI systems, coupled with their remarkable capabilities, can lead to a reliance on technologies that operate beyond direct human oversight or understanding. To mitigate the risks that arise, several theoretical tools and guidelines have been developed, alongside efforts to create technological tools aimed at safeguarding Trustworthy AI. The guidelines take a more holistic view of the issue but fail to provide techniques for quantifying trustworthiness. Conversely, while technological tools are better at achieving such quantification, they lack a holistic perspective, focusing instead on specific aspects of Trustworthy AI. This paper aims to introduce an assessment method that combines the ethical components of Trustworthy AI with the algorithmic processes of PageRank and TrustRank. The goal is to establish an assessment framework that minimizes the subjectivity inherent in the self-assessment techniques prevalent in the field by introducing algorithmic criteria. The application of our approach indicates that a holistic assessment of an AI system's trustworthiness can be achieved by providing quantitative insights while considering the theoretical content of relevant guidelines.

As AI systems become increasingly embedded in organizational workflows and consumer applications, ethical principles such as fairness, transparency, and robustness have been widely endorsed in policy and industry guidelines. However, there is still scarce empirical evidence on whether these principles are recognized, valued, or impactful from the perspective of users. This study investigates the link between ethical AI and user satisfaction by analyzing over 100,000 user reviews of AI products from G2.com. Using transformer - based language models, we measure sentiment across seven ethical dimensions defined by the EU Eth ics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. Our findings show that all seven dimensions are positively associated with user satisfaction. Yet, this relationship varies systematically across user and product types. Technical users and reviewers of AI development pla tforms more frequently discuss system - level concerns (e.g., transparency, data governance), while non - technical users and reviewers of end - user applications emphasize human - centric dimensions (e.g., human agency, societal well - being). Moreover, the association between ethical AI and user satisfaction is significantly stronger for non - technical users and end - user applications across all dimensions. Our results highlight the importance of ethical AI design from the user's perspective and underscore the need t o account for contextual differences across user roles and product types.

The integration of large language models into healthcare necessitates a rigorous evaluation of their ethical reasoning, an area current benchmarks often overlook. We introduce PrinciplismQA, a comprehensive benchmark with 3,648 questions designed to systematically assess LLMs' alignment with core medical ethics. Grounded in Principlism, our benchmark features a high-quality dataset. This includes multiple-choice questions curated from authoritative textbooks and open-ended questions sourced from authoritative medical ethics case study literature, all validated by medical experts. Our experiments reveal a significant gap between models' ethical knowledge and their practical application, especially in dynamically applying ethical principles to real-world scenarios. Most LLMs struggle with dilemmas concerning Beneficence, often over-emphasizing other principles. Frontier closed-source models, driven by strong general capabilities, currently lead the benchmark. Notably, medical domain fine-tuning can enhance models' overall ethical competence, but further progress requires better alignment with medical ethical knowledge. PrinciplismQA offers a scalable framework to diagnose these specific ethical weaknesses, paving the way for more balanced and responsible medical AI.

AI systems are gaining widespread adoption across various sectors and domains. Creating high-quality AI system requirements is crucial for aligning the AI system with business goals and consumer values and for social responsibility. However, with the uncertain nature of AI systems and the heavy reliance on sensitive data, more research is needed to address the elicitation and analysis of AI systems requirements. With the proprietary nature of many AI systems, there is a lack of open-source requirements artifacts and technical requirements documents for AI systems, limiting broader research and investigation. With Large Language Models (LLMs) emerging as a promising alternative to human-generated text, this paper investigates the potential use of LLMs to generate user stories for AI systems based on abstracts from scholarly papers. We conducted an empirical evaluation using three LLMs and generated $1260$ user stories from $42$ abstracts from $26$ domains. We assess their quality using the Quality User Story (QUS) framework. Moreover, we identify relevant non-functional requirements (NFRs) and ethical principles. Our analysis demonstrates that the investigated LLMs can generate user stories inspired by the needs of various stakeholders, offering a promising approach for generating user stories for research purposes and for aiding in the early requirements elicitation phase of AI systems. We have compiled and curated a collection of stories generated by various LLMs into a dataset (UStAI), which is now publicly available for use.

We augment Assumption Based Argumentation (ABA for short) with weighted argumentation. In a nutshell, we assign weights to arguments and then derive the weight of attacks between ABA arguments. We illustrate our proposal through running examples in the field of ethical reasoning, and present an implementation based on Answer Set Programming.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming sectors such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous systems, offering powerful tools for innovation. Yet its rapid integration raises urgent ethical concerns related to data ownership, privacy, and systemic bias. Issues like opaque decision-making, misleading outputs, and unfair treatment in high-stakes domains underscore the need for transparent and accountable AI systems. This article addresses these challenges by proposing a modular ethical assessment framework built on ontological blocks of meaning-discrete, interpretable units that encode ethical principles such as fairness, accountability, and ownership. By integrating these blocks with FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles, the framework supports scalable, transparent, and legally aligned ethical evaluations, including compliance with the EU AI Act. Using a real-world use case in AI-powered investor profiling, the paper demonstrates how the framework enables dynamic, behavior-informed risk classification. The findings suggest that ontological blocks offer a promising path toward explainable and auditable AI ethics, though challenges remain in automation and probabilistic reasoning.

A computational ethics framework is essential for AI and autonomous systems operating in complex, real-world environments. Existing approaches often lack the adaptability needed to integrate ethical principles into dynamic and ambiguous contexts, limiting their effectiveness across diverse scenarios. To address these challenges, we outline the necessary ingredients for building a holistic, meta-level framework that combines intermediate representations, probabilistic reasoning, and knowledge representation. The specifications therein emphasize scalability, supporting ethical reasoning at both individual decision-making levels and within the collective dynamics of multi-agent systems. By integrating theoretical principles with contextual factors, it facilitates structured and context-aware decision-making, ensuring alignment with overarching ethical standards. We further explore proposed theorems outlining how ethical reasoners should operate, offering a foundation for practical implementation. These constructs aim to support the development of robust and ethically reliable AI systems capable of navigating the complexities of real-world moral decision-making scenarios.

Moral reasoning is a complex cognitive process shaped by individual experiences and cultural contexts and presents unique challenges for computational analysis. While natural language processing (NLP) offers promising tools for studying this phenomenon, current research lacks cohesion, employing discordant datasets and tasks that examine isolated aspects of moral reasoning. We bridge this gap with UniMoral, a unified dataset integrating psychologically grounded and social-media-derived moral dilemmas annotated with labels for action choices, ethical principles, contributing factors, and consequences, alongside annotators' moral and cultural profiles. Recognizing the cultural relativity of moral reasoning, UniMoral spans six languages, Arabic, Chinese, English, Hindi, Russian, and Spanish, capturing diverse socio-cultural contexts. We demonstrate UniMoral's utility through a benchmark evaluations of three large language models (LLMs) across four tasks: action prediction, moral typology classification, factor attribution analysis, and consequence generation. Key findings reveal that while implicitly embedded moral contexts enhance the moral reasoning capability of LLMs, there remains a critical need for increasingly specialized approaches to further advance moral reasoning in these models.