{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,13]],"date-time":"2026-07-13T20:30:08Z","timestamp":1783974608108,"version":"3.55.0"},"reference-count":67,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,21]],"date-time":"2024-11-21T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1732147200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,21]],"date-time":"2024-11-21T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1732147200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100006447","name":"University of Zurich","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100006447","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Sci Eng Ethics"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>We address an open problem in the philosophy of artificial intelligence (AI): how to justify the epistemic attitudes we have towards the trustworthiness of AI systems. The problem is important, as providing reasons to believe that AI systems are worthy of trust is key to appropriately rely on these systems in human-AI interactions. In our approach, we consider the trustworthiness of an AI as a time-relative, composite property of the system with two distinct facets. One is the actual trustworthiness of the AI and the other is the perceived trustworthiness of the system as assessed by its users while interacting with it. We show that credences, namely, beliefs we hold with a degree of confidence, are the appropriate attitude for capturing the facets of the trustworthiness of an AI over time. Then, we introduce a reliabilistic account providing justification to the credences in the trustworthiness of AI, which we derive from Tang\u2019s probabilistic theory of justified credence. Our account stipulates that a credence in the trustworthiness of an AI system is justified if and only if it is caused by an assessment process that tends to result in a high proportion of credences for which the actual and perceived trustworthiness of the AI are calibrated. This approach informs research on the ethics of AI and human-AI interactions by providing actionable recommendations on how to measure the reliability of the process through which users perceive the trustworthiness of the system, investigating its calibration to the actual levels of trustworthiness of the AI as well as users\u2019 appropriate reliance on the system.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-024-00522-z","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,21]],"date-time":"2024-11-21T11:40:42Z","timestamp":1732189242000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":8,"title":["Justifying Our Credences in the Trustworthiness of AI Systems: A Reliabilistic Approach"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"30","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-9968-9474","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Andrea","family":"Ferrario","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,21]]},"reference":[{"issue":"2","key":"522_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"121","DOI":"10.1111\/bioe.12959","volume":"36","author":"R Alvarado","year":"2022","unstructured":"Alvarado, R. (2022a). Should we replace radiologists with deep learning? Pigeons, error and trust in medical AI. Bioethics, 36(2), 121\u2013133.","journal-title":"Bioethics"},{"issue":"4","key":"522_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1169","DOI":"10.1007\/s43681-022-00224-x","volume":"3","author":"R Alvarado","year":"2022","unstructured":"Alvarado, R. (2022b). What kind of trust does AI deserve, if any? AI and Ethics, 3(4), 1169\u20131183.","journal-title":"AI and Ethics"},{"issue":"5","key":"522_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"32","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-023-00451-3","volume":"29","author":"R Alvarado","year":"2023","unstructured":"Alvarado, R. (2023). AI as an epistemic technology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29(5), 32.","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"522_CR4","unstructured":"Alvarado, R. (2024). Challenges for computational reliabilism. Available at https:\/\/philsci-archive.pitt.edu\/23923\/1\/Challenges"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"177","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1468-0068.2004.00467.x","volume":"38","author":"JR Beebe","year":"2004","unstructured":"Beebe, J. R. (2004). The generality problem, statistical relevance and the tri-level hypothesis. No\u00fbs, 38(1), 177\u2013195.","journal-title":"No\u00fbs"},{"key":"522_CR6","unstructured":"Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., Bernstein, M. S., Bohg, J., Bosselut, A., Brunskill, E., et al. (2021). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv:2108.07258"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"53","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1475-4975.1980.tb00396.x","volume":"5","author":"L BonJour","year":"1980","unstructured":"BonJour, L. (1980). Externalist theories of empirical knowledge. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 5(1), 53\u201374.","journal-title":"Midwest Studies in Philosophy"},{"issue":"3\u20134","key":"522_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"217","DOI":"10.3233\/AO-140137","volume":"9","author":"S Borgo","year":"2014","unstructured":"Borgo, S., Franssen, M., Garbacz, P., Kitamura, Y., Mizoguchi, R., & Vermaas, P. E. (2014). Technical artifacts: An integrated perspective. Applied Ontology, 9(3\u20134), 217\u2013235.","journal-title":"Applied Ontology"},{"issue":"7","key":"522_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2641","DOI":"10.1007\/s10670-022-00645-4","volume":"89","author":"S Buijsman","year":"2024","unstructured":"Buijsman, S. (2024). Over what range should reliabilists measure reliability? Erkenntnis, 89(7), 2641\u20132661.","journal-title":"Erkenntnis"},{"key":"522_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"67","DOI":"10.1111\/phpe.12057","volume":"29","author":"J Carr","year":"2015","unstructured":"Carr, J. (2015). Chancy accuracy and imprecise credence. Philosophical Perspectives, 29, 67\u201381.","journal-title":"Philosophical Perspectives"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"27","DOI":"10.1007\/s11098-005-3020-z","volume":"129","author":"J Comesa\u00f1a","year":"2006","unstructured":"Comesa\u00f1a, J. (2006). A well-founded solution to the generality problem. Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, 129(1), 27\u201347.","journal-title":"Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition"},{"key":"522_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.inffus.2023.101896","volume":"99","author":"N D\u00edaz-Rodr\u00edguez","year":"2023","unstructured":"D\u00edaz-Rodr\u00edguez, N., Del Ser, J., Coeckelbergh, M., de Prado, M. L., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2023). Connecting the dots in trustworthy artificial intelligence: From AI principles, ethics, and key requirements to responsible AI systems and regulation. Information Fusion, 99, 101896.","journal-title":"Information Fusion"},{"issue":"7","key":"522_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1929","DOI":"10.1007\/s11098-014-0380-2","volume":"172","author":"J Dunn","year":"2015","unstructured":"Dunn, J. (2015). Reliability for degrees of belief. Philosophical Studies, 172(7), 1929\u20131952.","journal-title":"Philosophical Studies"},{"issue":"4","key":"522_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"645","DOI":"10.1007\/s11023-018-9481-6","volume":"28","author":"JM Dur\u00e1n","year":"2018","unstructured":"Dur\u00e1n, J. M., & Formanek, N. (2018). Grounds for trust: Essential epistemic opacity and computational reliabilism. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 645\u2013666.","journal-title":"Minds and Machines"},{"issue":"5","key":"522_CR15","first-page":"329","volume":"47","author":"JM Dur\u00e1n","year":"2021","unstructured":"Dur\u00e1n, J. M., & Jongsma, K. R. (2021). Who is afraid of black box algorithms? On the epistemological and ethical basis of trust in medical AI. Journal of Medical Ethics, 47(5), 329\u2013335.","journal-title":"Journal of Medical Ethics"},{"key":"522_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ehsan, U., Liao, Q. V., Muller, M., Riedl, M. O., & Weisz, J. D. (2021). Expanding explainability: Towards social transparency in AI systems. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1\u201319).","DOI":"10.1145\/3411764.3445188"},{"key":"522_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"183","DOI":"10.1007\/s11225-007-9059-4","volume":"86","author":"L Eriksson","year":"2007","unstructured":"Eriksson, L., & H\u00e1jek, A. (2007). What are degrees of belief? Studia Logica, 86, 183\u2013213.","journal-title":"Studia Logica"},{"key":"522_CR18","unstructured":"European Commission. (2018). Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. Available at https:\/\/digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu\/en\/library\/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai."},{"issue":"3","key":"522_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"30","DOI":"10.1007\/s11023-024-09681-1","volume":"34","author":"A Ferrario","year":"2024","unstructured":"Ferrario, A., Facchini, A., & Termine, A. (2024). Experts or authorities? The strange case of the presumed epistemic superiority of artificial intelligence systems. Minds & Machines, 34(3), 30.","journal-title":"Minds & Machines"},{"issue":"3","key":"522_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"165","DOI":"10.1136\/jme-2022-108371","volume":"49","author":"A Ferrario","year":"2023","unstructured":"Ferrario, A., Gloeckler, S., & Biller-Andorno, N. (2023). Ethics of the algorithmic prediction of goal of care preferences: From theory to practice. Journal of Medical Ethics, 49(3), 165\u2013174.","journal-title":"Journal of Medical Ethics"},{"key":"522_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ferrario, A., & Loi, M. (2022). How explainability contributes to trust in AI. In 2022 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 1457\u20131466).","DOI":"10.1145\/3531146.3533202"},{"key":"522_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"383","DOI":"10.1007\/s00134-019-05872-y","volume":"46","author":"LM Fleuren","year":"2020","unstructured":"Fleuren, L. M., Klausch, T. L., Zwager, C. L., Schoonmade, L. J., Guo, T., Roggeveen, L. F., Swart, E. L., Girbes, A. R., Thoral, P., Ercole, A., et al. (2020). Machine learning for the prediction of sepsis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy. Intensive Care Medicine, 46, 383\u2013400.","journal-title":"Intensive Care Medicine"},{"issue":"6","key":"522_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"261","DOI":"10.1038\/s42256-019-0055-y","volume":"1","author":"L Floridi","year":"2019","unstructured":"Floridi, L. (2019). Establishing the rules for building trustworthy AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(6), 261\u2013262.","journal-title":"Nature Machine Intelligence"},{"key":"522_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Floridi, L. & Cowls, J. (2022). A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. In Machine learning and the city (pp. 535\u2013545). Wiley.","DOI":"10.1002\/9781119815075.ch45"},{"key":"522_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1771","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-020-00213-5","volume":"26","author":"L Floridi","year":"2020","unstructured":"Floridi, L., Cowls, J., King, T. C., & Taddeo, M. (2020). How to design AI for social good: Seven essential factors. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26, 1771\u20131796.","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"522_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Floridi, L., Holweg, M., Taddeo, M., Amaya Silva, J., M\u00f6kander, J., & Wen, Y. (2022). CapAI-A procedure for conducting conformity assessment of AI systems in line with the EU Artificial Intelligence Act. Available at SSRN 4064091.","DOI":"10.2139\/ssrn.4064091"},{"issue":"4","key":"522_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1351","DOI":"10.1007\/s43681-022-00241-w","volume":"3","author":"O Freiman","year":"2023","unstructured":"Freiman, O. (2023). Making sense of the conceptual nonsense \u2018trustworthy AI\u2019. AI and Ethics, 3(4), 1351\u20131360.","journal-title":"AI and Ethics"},{"key":"522_CR28","first-page":"1","volume-title":"What is Justified Belief?, Justification and Knowledge","author":"AI Goldman","year":"1979","unstructured":"Goldman, A. I. (1979). What is justified belief? In George Sotiros Pappas (Ed.),\u00a0Justification and knowledge,(pp. 1\u201323). Springer."},{"key":"522_CR29","volume-title":"Epistemology and Cognition","author":"AI Goldman","year":"1986","unstructured":"Goldman, A. I. (1986). Epistemology and cognition. Harvard university Press."},{"issue":"3","key":"522_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"205","DOI":"10.1136\/medethics-2019-105586","volume":"46","author":"T Grote","year":"2020","unstructured":"Grote, T., & Berens, P. (2020). On the ethics of algorithmic decision-making in healthcare. Journal of Medical Ethics, 46(3), 205\u2013211.","journal-title":"Journal of Medical Ethics"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"99","DOI":"10.1007\/s11023-020-09517-8","volume":"30","author":"T Hagendorff","year":"2020","unstructured":"Hagendorff, T. (2020). The ethics of AI ethics: An evaluation of guidelines. Minds and Machines, 30(1), 99\u2013120.","journal-title":"Minds and Machines"},{"key":"522_CR32","unstructured":"H\u00e1jek, A. (2011). Philosophy program\u2014a puzzle about degree of belief. Available at http:\/\/fitelson.org\/coherence\/hajek_puzzle.pdf"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1111\/nous.12000","volume":"48","author":"K Hawley","year":"2014","unstructured":"Hawley, K. (2014). Trust, distrust and commitment. No\u00fbs, 48(1), 1\u201320.","journal-title":"No\u00fbs"},{"issue":"3","key":"522_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"615","DOI":"10.1007\/s11229-008-9435-2","volume":"169","author":"P Humphreys","year":"2009","unstructured":"Humphreys, P. (2009). The philosophical novelty of computer simulation methods. Synthese, 169(3), 615\u2013626.","journal-title":"Synthese"},{"key":"522_CR35","unstructured":"ISO24028:2020. (2020). Information technology\u2014Artificial Intelligence\u2014Overview of trustworthiness in Artificial Intelligence. International Organization for Standardization (ISO): Technical report."},{"issue":"6","key":"522_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/phc3.12668","volume":"15","author":"EG Jackson","year":"2020","unstructured":"Jackson, E. G. (2020). The relationship between belief and credence. Philosophy Compass, 15(6), e12668.","journal-title":"Philosophy Compass"},{"key":"522_CR37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Jacovi, A., Marasovi\u0107,A., Miller,T., & Goldberg, Y. (2021). Formalizing trust in artificial intelligence: Prerequisites, causes and goals of human trust in AI. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 624\u2013635).","DOI":"10.1145\/3442188.3445923"},{"issue":"9","key":"522_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"389","DOI":"10.1038\/s42256-019-0088-2","volume":"1","author":"A Jobin","year":"2019","unstructured":"Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389\u2013399.","journal-title":"Nature Machine Intelligence"},{"key":"522_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kaur, D., Uslu, S., Durresi, A., Badve, S., & Dundar, M. (2021). Trustworthy explainability acceptance: A new metric to measure the trustworthiness of interpretable AI medical diagnostic systems. In Complex, intelligent and software intensive systems: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on complex, intelligent and software intensive systems (CISIS-2021) (pp. 35\u201346). Springer.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-030-79725-6_4"},{"issue":"2","key":"522_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1145\/3491209","volume":"55","author":"D Kaur","year":"2022","unstructured":"Kaur, D., Uslu, S., Rittichier, K. J., & Durresi, A. (2022). Trustworthy artificial intelligence: A review. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 55(2), 1\u201338.","journal-title":"ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR)"},{"key":"522_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Knowles, B. & Richards, J. T. (2021). The sanction of authority: Promoting public trust in AI. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 262\u2013271).","DOI":"10.1145\/3442188.3445890"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3","DOI":"10.1111\/rego.12512","volume":"18","author":"J Laux","year":"2024","unstructured":"Laux, J., Wachter, S., & Mittelstadt, B. (2024). Trustworthy artificial intelligence and the European Union AI Act: On the conflation of trustworthiness and acceptability of risk. Regulation & Governance, 18(1), 3\u201332.","journal-title":"Regulation &amp; Governance"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR43","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"50","DOI":"10.1518\/hfes.46.1.50.30392","volume":"46","author":"JD Lee","year":"2004","unstructured":"Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50\u201380.","journal-title":"Human Factors"},{"issue":"9","key":"522_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1145\/3555803","volume":"55","author":"B Li","year":"2023","unstructured":"Li, B., Qi, P., Liu, B., Di, S., Liu, J., Pei, J., Yi, J., & Zhou, B. (2023). Trustworthy AI: From principles to practices. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(9), 1\u201346.","journal-title":"ACM Computing Surveys"},{"key":"522_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Liao, Q. V. & Sundar, S. S. (2022). Designing for responsible trust in AI systems: A communication perspective. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 1257\u20131268).","DOI":"10.1145\/3531146.3533182"},{"issue":"6","key":"522_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"186","DOI":"10.1007\/s11229-023-04169-4","volume":"201","author":"M Loi","year":"2023","unstructured":"Loi, M., Ferrario, A., & Vigan\u00f2, E. (2023). How much do you trust me? A logico-mathematical analysis of the concept of the intensity of trust. Synthese, 201(6), 186.","journal-title":"Synthese"},{"key":"522_CR47","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Loi, M., Heitz, C., Ferrario, A., Schmid, A., & Christen, M. (2019). Towards an ethical code for data-based business. In 2019 6th Swiss conference on data science (SDS) (pp. 6\u201312). IEEE.","DOI":"10.1109\/SDS.2019.00-15"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR48","first-page":"66","volume":"10","author":"F Longy","year":"2006","unstructured":"Longy, F. (2006). Function and probability: The making of artefacts. Techn\u00e9: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 10(1), 66\u201378.","journal-title":"Techn\u00e9: Research in Philosophy and Technology"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR49","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1007\/s43681-023-00394-2","volume":"4","author":"J Mattioli","year":"2024","unstructured":"Mattioli, J., Sohier, H., Delaborde, A., Amokrane-Ferka, K., Awadid, A., Chihani, Z., Khalfaoui, S., & Pedroza, G. (2024). An overview of key trustworthiness attributes and KPIs for trusted ML-based systems engineering. AI and Ethics, 4(1), 15\u201325.","journal-title":"AI and Ethics"},{"key":"522_CR50","volume-title":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","author":"C McLeod","year":"2021","unstructured":"McLeod, C. (2021). Trust. In M. Fall & E. N. Zalta (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University."},{"issue":"11","key":"522_CR51","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2247","DOI":"10.1038\/s41591-022-01993-y","volume":"28","author":"MY Ng","year":"2022","unstructured":"Ng, M. Y., Kapur, S., Blizinsky, K. D., & Hernandez-Boussard, T. (2022). The AI life cycle: A holistic approach to creating ethical AI for health decisions. Nature Medicine, 28(11), 2247\u20132249.","journal-title":"Nature Medicine"},{"issue":"1","key":"522_CR52","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"7","DOI":"10.1007\/s10676-022-09630-5","volume":"24","author":"PJ Nickel","year":"2022","unstructured":"Nickel, P. J. (2022). Trust in medical artificial intelligence: A discretionary account. Ethics and Information Technology, 24(1), 7.","journal-title":"Ethics and Information Technology"},{"key":"522_CR53","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Novelli, C., Casolari, F., Rotolo, A., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2023). Taking AI risks seriously: A proposal for the AI Act. Available at SSRN 4447964.","DOI":"10.2139\/ssrn.4447964"},{"issue":"10","key":"522_CR54","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"897","DOI":"10.1111\/phc3.12079","volume":"8","author":"R Pettigrew","year":"2013","unstructured":"Pettigrew, R. (2013). Epistemic utility and norms for credences. Philosophy Compass, 8(10), 897\u2013908.","journal-title":"Philosophy Compass"},{"key":"522_CR55","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Primiero, G., Ceolin, D., & Doneda, F. (2023). A computational model for assessing experts\u2019 trustworthiness. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 1\u201332.","DOI":"10.1080\/0952813X.2023.2183272"},{"issue":"5","key":"522_CR56","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2749","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-020-00228-y","volume":"26","author":"M Ryan","year":"2020","unstructured":"Ryan, M. (2020). In AI we trust: Ethics, artificial intelligence, and reliability. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(5), 2749\u20132767.","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"522_CR57","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Scharowski, N., Benk, M., K\u00fchne, S.J., Wettstein, L., & Br\u00fchlmann, F. (2023). Certification labels for trustworthy AI: Insights from an empirical mixed-method study. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 248\u2013260).","DOI":"10.1145\/3593013.3593994"},{"key":"522_CR58","unstructured":"Schemmer, M., Hemmer, P., K\u00fchl, N., Benz, C., & Satzger, G. (2022). Should I follow AI-based advice? Measuring appropriate reliance in human-AI decision-making. arXiv:2204.06916"},{"key":"522_CR59","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Schlicker, N., Uhde, A., Baum, K., Hirsch, M.C., & Langer, M. (2022). Calibrated trust as a result of accurate trustworthiness assessment\u2014Introducing the trustworthiness assessment model. Available at PsyArXiv: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.31234\/osf.io\/qhwvx.","DOI":"10.31234\/osf.io\/qhwvx"},{"key":"522_CR60","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sokol, K. & Flach, P. (2020). Explainability fact sheets: A framework for systematic assessment of explainable approaches. In Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency (pp. 56\u201367).","DOI":"10.1145\/3351095.3372870"},{"issue":"2","key":"522_CR61","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"243","DOI":"10.1007\/s11023-010-9201-3","volume":"20","author":"M Taddeo","year":"2010","unstructured":"Taddeo, M. (2010). Modelling trust in artificial agents, a first step toward the analysis of e-trust. Minds and Machines, 20(2), 243\u2013257.","journal-title":"Minds and Machines"},{"issue":"497","key":"522_CR62","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"63","DOI":"10.1093\/mind\/fzv199","volume":"125","author":"WH Tang","year":"2016","unstructured":"Tang, W. H. (2016). Reliability theories of justified credence. Mind, 125(497), 63\u201394.","journal-title":"Mind"},{"issue":"5","key":"522_CR63","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1463","DOI":"10.1007\/s11098-020-01491-2","volume":"178","author":"WH Tang","year":"2021","unstructured":"Tang, W. H. (2021). Reliabilism and imprecise credences. Philosophical Studies, 178(5), 1463\u20131480.","journal-title":"Philosophical Studies"},{"key":"522_CR64","first-page":"295","volume-title":"Calibration: A Frequency Justification for Personal Probability, Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis: Essays in Honour of Adolf Gr\u00fcnbaum","author":"BC Van Fraassen","year":"1983","unstructured":"Van Fraassen, B. C. (1983). Calibration: A Frequency Justification for Personal Probability, Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis: Essays in Honour of Adolf Gr\u00fcnbaum (pp. 295\u2013319). Springer."},{"key":"522_CR65","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"493","DOI":"10.1016\/B978-0-444-51555-1.50016-X","volume":"4","author":"J Williamson","year":"2009","unstructured":"Williamson, J. (2009). Philosophies of probability. Handbook of the Philosophy of Mathematics, 4, 493\u2013533.","journal-title":"Handbook of the Philosophy of Mathematics"},{"issue":"4","key":"522_CR66","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.patter.2022.100455","volume":"3","author":"J Zerilli","year":"2022","unstructured":"Zerilli, J., Bhatt, U., & Weller, A. (2022). How transparency modulates trust in artificial intelligence. Patterns, 3(4), 100455.","journal-title":"Patterns"},{"key":"522_CR67","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"\u017dliobait\u0117, I., Pechenizkiy, M., & Gama, J. (2016). An overview of concept drift applications. In Big Data analysis: New algorithms for a new society (pp. 91\u2013114).","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-319-26989-4_4"}],"container-title":["Science and Engineering Ethics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00522-z.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00522-z\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00522-z.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,12,18]],"date-time":"2024-12-18T13:08:34Z","timestamp":1734527314000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00522-z"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,21]]},"references-count":67,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,12]]}},"alternative-id":["522"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00522-z","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-5546"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-5546","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,21]]},"assertion":[{"value":"14 October 2023","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"1 November 2024","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"21 November 2024","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"No interest to be disclosed.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for Publication"}}],"article-number":"55"}}