Research Papers

Best Practices in the Creation and Use of Emotion Lexicons

Saif M. Mohammad

Words play a central role in how we express ourselves. Lexicons of word-emotion associations are widely used in research and real-world applications for sentiment analysis, tracking emotions associated with products and policies, studying health disorders, tracking emotional arcs of stories, and so on. However, inappropriate and incorrect use of these lexicons can lead to not just sub-optimal results, but also inferences that are directly harmful to people. This paper brings together ideas from Affective Computing and AI Ethics to present, some of the practical and ethical considerations involved in the creation and use of emotion lexicons -- best practices. The goal is to provide a comprehensive set of relevant considerations, so that readers (especially those new to work with emotions) can find relevant information in one place. We hope this work will facilitate more thoughtfulness when one is deciding on what emotions to work on, how to create an emotion lexicon, how to use an emotion lexicon, how to draw meaningful inferences, and how to judge success.

As data-driven systems are increasingly deployed at scale, ethical concerns have arisen around unfair and discriminatory outcomes for historically marginalized groups that are underrepresented in training data. In response, work around AI fairness and inclusion has called for datasets that are representative of various demographic groups. In this paper, we contribute an analysis of the representativeness of age, gender, and race & ethnicity in accessibility datasets - datasets sourced from people with disabilities and older adults - that can potentially play an important role in mitigating bias for inclusive AI-infused applications. We examine the current state of representation within datasets sourced by people with disabilities by reviewing publicly-available information of 190 datasets, we call these accessibility datasets. We find that accessibility datasets represent diverse ages, but have gender and race representation gaps. Additionally, we investigate how the sensitive and complex nature of demographic variables makes classification difficult and inconsistent (e.g., gender, race & ethnicity), with the source of labeling often unknown. By reflecting on the current challenges and opportunities for representation of disabled data contributors, we hope our effort expands the space of possibility for greater inclusion of marginalized communities in AI-infused systems.

From tools to thieves: Measuring and understanding public perceptions of AI through crowdsourced metaphors

Myra Cheng, Angela Y. Lee, Kristina Rapuano +3

How has the public responded to the increasing prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies? We investigate public perceptions of AI by collecting over 12,000 responses over 12 months from a nationally representative U.S. sample. Participants provided open-ended metaphors reflecting their mental models of AI, a methodology that overcomes the limitations of traditional self-reported measures by capturing more nuance. Using a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative clustering and qualitative coding, we identify 20 dominant metaphors shaping public understanding of AI. To analyze these metaphors systematically, we present a scalable framework integrating language modeling (LM)-based techniques to measure key dimensions of public perception: anthropomorphism (attribution of human-like qualities), warmth, and competence. We find that Americans generally view AI as warm and competent, and that over the past year, perceptions of AI's human-likeness and warmth have significantly increased ($+34\%, r = 0.80, p < 0.01; +41\%, r = 0.62, p < 0.05$). These implicit perceptions, along with the identified dominant metaphors, strongly predict trust in and willingness to adopt AI ($r^2 = 0.21, 0.18, p < 0.001$). Moreover, we uncover systematic demographic differences in metaphors and implicit perceptions, such as the higher propensity of women, older individuals, and people of color to anthropomorphize AI, which shed light on demographic disparities in trust and adoption. In addition to our dataset and framework for tracking evolving public attitudes, we provide actionable insights on using metaphors for inclusive and responsible AI development.

RadEdit: stress-testing biomedical vision models via diffusion image editing

Fernando Pérez-García, Sam Bond-Taylor, Pedro P. Sanchez +11

Biomedical imaging datasets are often small and biased, meaning that real-world performance of predictive models can be substantially lower than expected from internal testing. This work proposes using generative image editing to simulate dataset shifts and diagnose failure modes of biomedical vision models; this can be used in advance of deployment to assess readiness, potentially reducing cost and patient harm. Existing editing methods can produce undesirable changes, with spurious correlations learned due to the co-occurrence of disease and treatment interventions, limiting practical applicability. To address this, we train a text-to-image diffusion model on multiple chest X-ray datasets and introduce a new editing method RadEdit that uses multiple masks, if present, to constrain changes and ensure consistency in the edited images. We consider three types of dataset shifts: acquisition shift, manifestation shift, and population shift, and demonstrate that our approach can diagnose failures and quantify model robustness without additional data collection, complementing more qualitative tools for explainable AI.

Benchmarking Algorithmic Bias in Face Recognition: An Experimental Approach Using Synthetic Faces and Human Evaluation

Hao Liang, Pietro Perona, Guha Balakrishnan

We propose an experimental method for measuring bias in face recognition systems. Existing methods to measure bias depend on benchmark datasets that are collected in the wild and annotated for protected (e.g., race, gender) and non-protected (e.g., pose, lighting) attributes. Such observational datasets only permit correlational conclusions, e.g., "Algorithm A's accuracy is different on female and male faces in dataset X.". By contrast, experimental methods manipulate attributes individually and thus permit causal conclusions, e.g., "Algorithm A's accuracy is affected by gender and skin color." Our method is based on generating synthetic faces using a neural face generator, where each attribute of interest is modified independently while leaving all other attributes constant. Human observers crucially provide the ground truth on perceptual identity similarity between synthetic image pairs. We validate our method quantitatively by evaluating race and gender biases of three research-grade face recognition models. Our synthetic pipeline reveals that for these algorithms, accuracy is lower for Black and East Asian population subgroups. Our method can also quantify how perceptual changes in attributes affect face identity distances reported by these models. Our large synthetic dataset, consisting of 48,000 synthetic face image pairs (10,200 unique synthetic faces) and 555,000 human annotations (individual attributes and pairwise identity comparisons) is available to researchers in this important area.

Despite significant advancements in AI-driven educational systems and ongoing calls for responsible AI for education, several critical issues remain unresolved -- acting as the elephant in the room within AI in education, learning analytics, educational data mining, learning sciences, and educational psychology communities. This critical analysis identifies and examines nine persistent challenges that continue to undermine the fairness, transparency, and effectiveness of current AI methods and applications in education. These include: (1) the lack of clarity around what AI for education truly means -- often ignoring the distinct purposes, strengths, and limitations of different AI families -- and the trend of equating it with domain-agnostic, company-driven large language models; (2) the widespread neglect of essential learning processes such as motivation, emotion, and (meta)cognition in AI-driven learner modelling and their contextual nature; (3) limited integration of domain knowledge and lack of stakeholder involvement in AI design and development; (4) continued use of non-sequential machine learning models on temporal educational data; (5) misuse of non-sequential metrics to evaluate sequential models; (6) use of unreliable explainable AI methods to provide explanations for black-box models; (7) ignoring ethical guidelines in addressing data inconsistencies during model training; (8) use of mainstream AI methods for pattern discovery and learning analytics without systematic benchmarking; and (9) overemphasis on global prescriptions while overlooking localised, student-specific recommendations. Supported by theoretical and empirical research, we demonstrate how hybrid AI methods -- specifically neural-symbolic AI -- can address the elephant in the room and serve as the foundation for responsible, trustworthy AI systems in education.

As the real-world impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems has been steadily growing, so too have these systems come under increasing scrutiny. In response, the study of AI fairness has rapidly developed into a rich field of research with links to computer science, social science, law, and philosophy. Many technical solutions for measuring and achieving AI fairness have been proposed, yet their approach has been criticized in recent years for being misleading, unrealistic and harmful. In our paper, we survey these criticisms of AI fairness and identify key limitations that are inherent to the prototypical paradigm of AI fairness. By carefully outlining the extent to which technical solutions can realistically help in achieving AI fairness, we aim to provide the background necessary to form a nuanced opinion on developments in fair AI. This delineation also provides research opportunities for non-AI solutions peripheral to AI systems in supporting fair decision processes.

Algorithmic Bias in Recidivism Prediction: A Causal Perspective

Aria Khademi, Vasant Honavar

ProPublica's analysis of recidivism predictions produced by Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions (COMPAS) software tool for the task, has shown that the predictions were racially biased against African American defendants. We analyze the COMPAS data using a causal reformulation of the underlying algorithmic fairness problem. Specifically, we assess whether COMPAS exhibits racial bias against African American defendants using FACT, a recently introduced causality grounded measure of algorithmic fairness. We use the Neyman-Rubin potential outcomes framework for causal inference from observational data to estimate FACT from COMPAS data. Our analysis offers strong evidence that COMPAS exhibits racial bias against African American defendants. We further show that the FACT estimates from COMPAS data are robust in the presence of unmeasured confounding.

This cross-sectional study investigates how preservice teachers in the Global South engage with Generative Artificial Intelligence across academic and instructional tasks while navigating infrastructural barriers such as limited internet access and high data costs. The study surveyed 167 preservice teachers from four teacher education institutions in Ghana. Descriptive statistics and inferential analyses, including multiple and ordinal logistic regressions, were used to examine patterns of GenAI use. Findings show that preservice teachers rely on GenAI as a learning companion for locating reading materials, accessing detailed content explanations, and identifying practical examples. They also use GenAI as a teaching assistant for tasks related to lesson preparation, including generating instructional resources, identifying assessment strategies, and developing lesson objectives. Usage patterns indicate that students in their third and fourth years have significantly higher frequencies of GenAI use compared to those in earlier years. Gender was not a significant predictor of GenAI adoption, in contrast to class level and age. Participants reported positive attitudes toward GenAI, noting that it supports autonomous learning and reduces dependence on peers and instructors for routine academic and teaching activities. However, challenges such as high data costs, occasional inaccuracies in GenAI outputs, and concerns about academic dishonesty were identified as factors that limit more frequent use. The study recommends the integration of GenAI literacy in teacher education programs, with a focus on ethical and responsible AI use to support equitable adoption in the Global South.

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) speech generation and voice cloning technologies have produced naturalistic speech and accurate voice replication, yet their influence on sociotechnical systems across diverse accents and linguistic traits is not fully understood. This study evaluates two synthetic AI voice services (Speechify and ElevenLabs) through a mixed methods approach using surveys and interviews to assess technical performance and uncover how users' lived experiences influence their perceptions of accent variations in these speech technologies. Our findings reveal technical performance disparities across five regional, English-language accents and demonstrate how current speech generation technologies may inadvertently reinforce linguistic privilege and accent-based discrimination, potentially creating new forms of digital exclusion. Overall, our study highlights the need for inclusive design and regulation by providing actionable insights for developers, policymakers, and organizations to ensure equitable and socially responsible AI speech technologies.

The successful application of machine learning (ML) in catalyst design relies on high-quality and diverse data to ensure effective generalization to novel compositions, thereby aiding in catalyst discovery. However, due to complex interactions, catalyst design has long relied on trial-and-error, a costly and labor-intensive process leading to scarce data that is heavily biased towards undesired, low-yield catalysts. Despite the rise of ML in this field, most efforts have not focused on dealing with the challenges presented by such experimental data. To address these challenges, we introduce a robust machine learning and explainable AI (XAI) framework to accurately classify the catalytic yield of various compositions and identify the contributions of individual components. This framework combines a series of ML practices designed to handle the scarcity and imbalance of catalyst data. We apply the framework to classify the yield of various catalyst compositions in oxidative methane coupling, and use it to evaluate the performance of a range of ML models: tree-based models, logistic regression, support vector machines, and neural networks. These experiments demonstrate that the methods used in our framework lead to a significant improvement in the performance of all but one of the evaluated models. Additionally, the decision-making process of each ML model is analyzed by identifying the most important features for predicting catalyst performance using XAI methods. Our analysis found that XAI methods, providing class-aware explanations, such as Layer-wise Relevance Propagation, identified key components that contribute specifically to high-yield catalysts. These findings align with chemical intuition and existing literature, reinforcing their validity. We believe that such insights can assist chemists in the development and identification of novel catalysts with superior performance.

Conceptualizing Approaches to Critical Computing Education: Inquiry, Design and Reimagination

Luis Morales-Navarro, Yasmin B. Kafai

As several critical issues in computing such as algorithmic bias, discriminatory practices, and techno-solutionism have become more visible, numerous efforts are being proposed to integrate criticality in K-16 computing education. Yet, how exactly these efforts address criticality and translate it into classroom practice is not clear. In this conceptual paper, we first historicize how current efforts in critical computing education draw on previous work which has promoted learner empowerment through critical analysis and production. We then identify three emergent approaches: (1) inquiry, (2) design and (3) reimagination that build on and expand these critical traditions in computing education. Finally, we discuss how these approaches highlight issues to be addressed and provide directions for further computing education research.