This paper presents a theoretical analysis and practical approach to the moral responsibilities when developing AI systems for non-military applications that may nonetheless be used for conflict applications. We argue that AI represents a form of crossover technology that is different from previous historical examples of dual- or multi-use technology as it has a multiplicative effect across other technologies. As a result, existing analyses of ethical responsibilities around dual-use technologies do not necessarily work for AI systems. We instead argue that stakeholders involved in the AI system lifecycle are morally responsible for uses of their systems that are reasonably foreseeable. The core idea is that an agent's moral responsibility for some action is not necessarily determined by their intentions alone; we must also consider what the agent could reasonably have foreseen to be potential outcomes of their action, such as the potential use of a system in conflict even when it is not designed for that. In particular, we contend that it is reasonably foreseeable that: (1) civilian AI systems will be applied to active conflict, including conflict support activities, (2) the use of civilian AI systems in conflict will impact applications of the law of armed conflict, and (3) crossover AI technology will be applied to conflicts that fall short of armed conflict. Given these reasonably foreseeably outcomes, we present three technically feasible actions that developers of civilian AIs can take to potentially mitigate their moral responsibility: (a) establishing systematic approaches to multi-perspective capability testing, (b) integrating digital watermarking in model weight matrices, and (c) utilizing monitoring and reporting mechanisms for conflict-related AI applications.

翻译：本文针对开发非军事应用但仍可能用于冲突场景的AI系统时的道德责任，提出了一项理论分析与实践方法。我们认为，AI代表了一种交叉技术形式，与历史上双重用途或多重用途技术的案例不同，它会对其他技术产生倍增效应。因此，现有关于双用途技术伦理责任的分析并不一定适用于AI系统。我们主张，AI系统生命周期中的相关利益方对其系统可合理预见的用途负有道德责任。核心观点是：行为主体对某行为的道德责任并不完全由其意图决定；还必须考虑该行为主体合理可预见的潜在结果，例如系统被用于冲突（即便并非为此设计）的可能性。具体而言，我们认为以下情况是合理可预见的：(1)民用AI系统将被应用于主动冲突，包括冲突支持活动；(2)民用AI系统在冲突中的使用将影响武装冲突法的适用；(3)交叉AI技术将被应用于未达到武装冲突程度的冲突。基于这些合理可预见的结果，我们提出了民用AI开发者可采取的三项技术可行行动以可能减轻其道德责任：(a)建立多视角能力测试的系统化方法，(b)在模型权重矩阵中集成数字水印，(c)利用监测与报告机制追踪与冲突相关的AI应用。