PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
AI-driven brain-computed interfaces aimed at restoring speech for individuals living with locked-in-syndrome are paired with ethical implications for user\'s autonomy, privacy and responsibility. Embedding options for sufficient levels of user-control in speech-BCI design has been proposed to mitigate these ethical challenges. However, how user-control in speech-BCIs is conceptualized and how it relates to these ethical challenges is underdetermined. In this narrative literature review, we aim to clarify and explicate the notion of user-control in speech-BCIs, to better understand in what way user-control could operationalize user\'s autonomy, privacy and responsibility and explore how such suggestions for increasing user-control can be translated to recommendations for the design or use of speech-BCIs. First, we identified types of user control, including executory control that can protect voluntariness of speech, and guidance control that can contribute to semantic accuracy. Second, we identified potential causes for a loss of user-control, including contributions of predictive language models, a lack of ability for neural control, or signal interference and external control. Such a loss of user control may have implications for semantic accuracy and mental privacy. Third we explored ways to design for user-control. While embedding initiation signals for users may increase executory control, they may conflict with other aims such as speed and continuity of speech. Design mechanisms for guidance control remain largely conceptual, similar trade-offs in design may be expected. We argue that preceding these trade-offs, the overarching aim of speech-BCIs needs to be defined, requiring input from current and potential users. Additionally, conceptual clarification of user-control and other (ethical) concepts in this debate has practical relevance for BCI researchers. For instance, different concepts of inner speech may have distinct ethical implications. Increased clarity of such concepts can improve anticipation of ethical implications of speech-BCIs and may help to steer design decisions.
摘要：
人工智能驱动的大脑计算机接口旨在恢复患有锁定综合征的人的语音，这与对用户自主性的伦理影响相匹配。隐私和责任。已经提出了在语音BCI设计中嵌入足够级别的用户控制的选项，以减轻这些道德挑战。然而,语音BCI中的用户控制是如何概念化的，以及它与这些道德挑战的关系还不确定。在这篇叙事文献综述中，我们的目标是澄清和阐明语音BCI中用户控制的概念，为了更好地理解用户控制可以以何种方式实现用户的自主性，隐私和责任，并探讨如何将这些增加用户控制的建议转化为设计或使用语音BCI的建议。首先,我们确定了用户控件的类型，包括可以保护言论自愿性的执行控制，和引导控制有助于语义准确性。第二,我们确定了用户失去控制的潜在原因，包括预测性语言模型的贡献，缺乏神经控制能力，或信号干扰和外部控制。这种用户控制的丧失可能对语义准确性和心理隐私有影响。第三，我们探索了设计用户控件的方法。虽然为用户嵌入启动信号可能会增加执行控制，它们可能与其他目标相冲突，例如语音的速度和连续性。制导控制的设计机制在很大程度上仍然是概念性的，在设计上可能会有类似的权衡。我们认为，在这些权衡之前，需要定义语音BCI的总体目标，需要来自当前和潜在用户的输入。此外,在这场辩论中，对用户控制和其他（道德）概念的概念澄清对BCI研究人员具有实际意义。例如,不同的内在言语概念可能具有不同的伦理含义。此类概念的清晰度提高可以提高对语音BCI的道德含义的预期，并可能有助于指导设计决策。
