Research Papers

Systems that augment sensory abilities are increasingly employing AI and machine learning (ML) approaches, with applications ranging from object recognition and scene description tools for blind users to sound awareness tools for d/Deaf users. However, unlike many other AI-enabled technologies, these systems provide information that is already available to non-disabled people. In this paper, we discuss unique AI fairness challenges that arise in this context, including accessibility issues with data and models, ethical implications in deciding what sensory information to convey to the user, and privacy concerns both for the primary user and for others.

Life satisfaction is a crucial facet of human well-being. Hence, research on life satisfaction is incumbent for understanding how individuals experience their lives and influencing interventions targeted at enhancing mental health and well-being. Life satisfaction has traditionally been measured using analog, complicated, and frequently error-prone methods. These methods raise questions concerning validation and propagation. However, this study demonstrates the potential for machine learning algorithms to predict life satisfaction with a high accuracy of 93.80% and a 73.00% macro F1-score. The dataset comes from a government survey of 19000 people aged 16-64 years in Denmark. Using feature learning techniques, 27 significant questions for assessing contentment were extracted, making the study highly reproducible, simple, and easily interpretable. Furthermore, clinical and biomedical large language models (LLMs) were explored for predicting life satisfaction by converting tabular data into natural language sentences through mapping and adding meaningful counterparts, achieving an accuracy of 93.74% and macro F1-score of 73.21%. It was found that life satisfaction prediction is more closely related to the biomedical domain than the clinical domain. Ablation studies were also conducted to understand the impact of data resampling and feature selection techniques on model performance. Moreover, the correlation between primary determinants with different age brackets was analyzed, and it was found that health condition is the most important determinant across all ages. This study demonstrates how machine learning, large language models and XAI can jointly contribute to building trust and understanding in using AI to investigate human behavior, with significant ramifications for academics and professionals working to quantify and comprehend subjective well-being.

Algorithmic modeling relies on limited information in data to extrapolate outcomes for unseen scenarios, often embedding an element of arbitrariness in its decisions. A perspective on this arbitrariness that has recently gained interest is multiplicity-the study of arbitrariness across a set of "good models", i.e., those likely to be deployed in practice. In this work, we systemize the literature on multiplicity by: (a) formalizing the terminology around model design choices and their contribution to arbitrariness, (b) expanding the definition of multiplicity to incorporate underrepresented forms beyond just predictions and explanations, (c) clarifying the distinction between multiplicity and other lenses of arbitrariness, i.e., uncertainty and variance, and (d) distilling the benefits and potential risks of multiplicity into overarching trends, situating it within the broader landscape of responsible AI. We conclude by identifying open research questions and highlighting emerging trends in this young but rapidly growing area of research.

This paper explores the dual impact of digital banks and alternative lenders on financial inclusion and the regulatory challenges posed by their business models. It discusses the integration of digital platforms, machine learning (ML), and Large Language Models (LLMs) in enhancing financial services accessibility for underserved populations. Through a detailed analysis of operational frameworks and technological infrastructures, this research identifies key mechanisms that facilitate broader financial access and mitigate traditional barriers. Additionally, the paper addresses significant regulatory concerns involving data privacy, algorithmic bias, financial stability, and consumer protection. Employing a mixed-methods approach, which combines quantitative financial data analysis with qualitative insights from industry experts, this paper elucidates the complexities of leveraging digital technology to foster financial inclusivity. The findings underscore the necessity of evolving regulatory frameworks that harmonize innovation with comprehensive risk management. This paper concludes with policy recommendations for regulators, financial institutions, and technology providers, aiming to cultivate a more inclusive and stable financial ecosystem through prudent digital technology integration.

Auditing the Use of Language Models to Guide Hiring Decisions

Johann D. Gaebler, Sharad Goel, Aziz Huq +1

Regulatory efforts to protect against algorithmic bias have taken on increased urgency with rapid advances in large language models (LLMs), which are machine learning models that can achieve performance rivaling human experts on a wide array of tasks. A key theme of these initiatives is algorithmic "auditing," but current regulations -- as well as the scientific literature -- provide little guidance on how to conduct these assessments. Here we propose and investigate one approach for auditing algorithms: correspondence experiments, a widely applied tool for detecting bias in human judgements. In the employment context, correspondence experiments aim to measure the extent to which race and gender impact decisions by experimentally manipulating elements of submitted application materials that suggest an applicant's demographic traits, such as their listed name. We apply this method to audit candidate assessments produced by several state-of-the-art LLMs, using a novel corpus of applications to K-12 teaching positions in a large public school district. We find evidence of moderate race and gender disparities, a pattern largely robust to varying the types of application material input to the models, as well as the framing of the task to the LLMs. We conclude by discussing some important limitations of correspondence experiments for auditing algorithms.

This paper explores the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in the context of sustainable agricultural development across diverse regions in Africa. Delving into opportunities, challenges, and impact, the study navigates through the dynamic landscape of AI applications in agriculture. Opportunities such as precision farming, crop monitoring, and climate-resilient practices are examined, alongside challenges related to technological infrastructure, data accessibility, and skill gaps. The article analyzes the impact of AI on smallholder farmers, supply chains, and inclusive growth. Ethical considerations and policy implications are also discussed, offering insights into responsible AI integration. By providing a nuanced understanding, this paper contributes to the ongoing discourse on leveraging AI for fostering sustainability in African agriculture.

This article reviews the landscape of ethical challenges of integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into smart healthcare products, including medical electronic devices. Differences between traditional ethics in the medical domain and emerging ethical challenges with AI-driven healthcare are presented, particularly as they relate to transparency, bias, privacy, safety, responsibility, justice, and autonomy. Open challenges and recommendations are outlined to enable the integration of ethical principles into the design, validation, clinical trials, deployment, monitoring, repair, and retirement of AI-based smart healthcare products.

We perform a socio-computational interrogation of the google search by image algorithm, a main component of the google search engine. We audit the algorithm by presenting it with more than 40 thousands faces of all ages and more than four races and collecting and analyzing the assigned labels with the appropriate statistical tools. We find that the algorithm reproduces white male patriarchal structures, often simplifying, stereotyping and discriminating females and non-white individuals, while providing more diverse and positive descriptions of white men. By drawing from Bourdieu's theory of cultural reproduction, we link these results to the attitudes of the algorithm's designers, owners, and the dataset the algorithm was trained on. We further underpin the problematic nature of the algorithm by using the ethnographic practice of studying-up: We show how the algorithm places individuals at the top of the tech industry within the socio-cultural reality that they shaped, many times creating biased representations of them. We claim that the use of social-theoretic frameworks such as the above are able to contribute to improved algorithmic accountability, algorithmic impact assessment and provide additional and more critical depth in algorithmic bias and auditing studies. Based on the analysis, we discuss the scientific and design implications and provide suggestions for alternative ways to design just socioalgorithmic systems.

In recent years, the games industry has made a major move towards data-driven development, using data analytics and player modeling to inform design decisions. Data-driven techniques are beneficial as they allow for the study of player behavior at scale, making them very applicable to modern digital game development. However, with this move towards data driven decision-making comes a number of ethical concerns. Previous work in player modeling as well as work in the fields of AI and machine learning have demonstrated several ways in which algorithmic decision-making can be flawed due to data or algorithmic bias or lack of data from specific groups. Further, black box algorithms create a trust problem due to lack of interpretability and transparency of the results or models developed based on the data, requiring blind faith in the results. In this position paper, we discuss several factors affecting the use of game data in the development cycle. In addition to issues raised by previous work, we also raise issues with algorithms marginalizing certain player groups and flaws in the resulting models due to their inability to reason about situational factors affecting players' decisions. Further, we outline some work that seeks to address these problems and identify some open problems concerning ethics and game data science.

Epistemic injustice related to AI is a growing concern. In relation to machine learning models, epistemic injustice can have a diverse range of sources, ranging from epistemic opacity, the discriminatory automation of testimonial prejudice, and the distortion of human beliefs via generative AI's hallucinations to the exclusion of the global South in global AI governance, the execution of bureaucratic violence via algorithmic systems, and interactions with conversational artificial agents. Based on a proposed general taxonomy of epistemic injustice, this paper first sketches a taxonomy of the types of epistemic injustice in the context of AI, relying on the work of scholars from the fields of philosophy of technology, political philosophy and social epistemology. Secondly, an additional conceptualization on epistemic injustice in the context of AI is provided: generative hermeneutical erasure. I argue that this injustice the automation of 'epistemicide', the injustice done to epistemic agents in their capacity for collective sense-making through the suppression of difference in epistemology and conceptualization by LLMs. AI systems' 'view from nowhere' epistemically inferiorizes non-Western epistemologies and thereby contributes to the erosion of their epistemic particulars, gradually contributing to hermeneutical erasure. This work's relevance lies in proposal of a taxonomy that allows epistemic injustices to be mapped in the AI domain and the proposal of a novel form of AI-related epistemic injustice.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) models are now being utilized in all facets of our lives such as healthcare, education and employment. Since they are used in numerous sensitive environments and make decisions that can be life altering, potential biased outcomes are a pressing matter. Developers should ensure that such models don't manifest any unexpected discriminatory practices like partiality for certain genders, ethnicities or disabled people. With the ubiquitous dissemination of AI systems, researchers and practitioners are becoming more aware of unfair models and are bound to mitigate bias in them. Significant research has been conducted in addressing such issues to ensure models don't intentionally or unintentionally perpetuate bias. This survey offers a synopsis of the different ways researchers have promoted fairness in AI systems. We explore the different definitions of fairness existing in the current literature. We create a comprehensive taxonomy by categorizing different types of bias and investigate cases of biased AI in different application domains. A thorough study is conducted of the approaches and techniques employed by researchers to mitigate bias in AI models. Moreover, we also delve into the impact of biased models on user experience and the ethical considerations to contemplate when developing and deploying such models. We hope this survey helps researchers and practitioners understand the intricate details of fairness and bias in AI systems. By sharing this thorough survey, we aim to promote additional discourse in the domain of equitable and responsible AI.

What counts as legitimate AI ethics labor, and consequently, what are the epistemic terms on which AI ethics claims are rendered legitimate? Based on 75 interviews with technologists including researchers, developers, open source contributors, and activists, this paper explores the various epistemic bases from which AI ethics is discussed and practiced. In the context of outside attacks on AI ethics as an impediment to "progress," I show how some AI ethics practices have reached toward authority from automation and quantification, and achieved some legitimacy as a result, while those based on richly embodied and situated lived experience have not. This paper draws together the work of feminist Anthropology and Science and Technology Studies scholars Diana Forsythe and Lucy Suchman with the works of postcolonial feminist theorist Sara Ahmed and Black feminist theorist Kristie Dotson to examine the implications of dominant AI ethics practices. By entrenching the epistemic power of quantification, dominant AI ethics practices -- employing Model Cards and similar interventions -- risk legitimizing AI ethics as a project in equal and opposite measure to which they marginalize embodied lived experience as a legitimate part of the same project. In response, I propose humble technical practices: quantified or technical practices which specifically seek to make their epistemic limits clear in order to flatten hierarchies of epistemic power.