Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userToward AI Assistants That Let Designers Design
126
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Sebastiaan De Peuter
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
AI for supporting designers needs to be rethought. It should aim to cooperate, not automate, by supporting and leveraging the creativity and problem-solving of designers. The challenge for such AI is how to infer designers goals and then help them without being needlessly disruptive. We present AI-assisted design: a framework for creating such AI, built around generative user models which enable reasoning about designers goals, reasoning, and capabilities.
rate research
Read More
Non-experts have long made important contributions to machine learning (ML) by contributing training data, and recent work has shown that non-experts can also help with feature engineering by suggesting novel predictive features. However, non-experts have only contributed features to prediction tasks already posed by experienced ML practitioners. Here we study how non-experts can design prediction tasks themselves, what types of tasks non-experts will design, and whether predictive models can be automatically trained on data sourced for their tasks. We use a crowdsourcing platform where non-experts design predictive tasks that are then categorized and ranked by the crowd. Crowdsourced data are collected for top-ranked tasks and predictive models are then trained and evaluated automatically using those data. We show that individuals without ML experience can collectively construct useful datasets and that predictive models can be learned on these datasets, but challenges remain. The prediction tasks designed by non-experts covered a broad range of domains, from politics and current events to health behavior, demographics, and more. Proper instructions are crucial for non-experts, so we also conducted a randomized trial to understand how different instructions may influence the types of prediction tasks being proposed. In general, understanding better how non-experts can contribute to ML can further leverage advances in Automatic ML and has important implications as ML continues to drive workplace automation.
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) is changing our lives in many ways. One application domain is data science. New techniques in automating the creation of AI, known as AutoAI or AutoML, aim to automate the work practices of data scientists. AutoAI systems are capable of autonomously ingesting and pre-processing data, engineering new features, and creating and scoring models based on a target objectives (e.g. accuracy or run-time efficiency). Though not yet widely adopted, we are interested in understanding how AutoAI will impact the practice of data science. We conducted interviews with 20 data scientists who work at a large, multinational technology company and practice data science in various business settings. Our goal is to understand their current work practices and how these practices might change with AutoAI. Reactions were mixed: while informants expressed concerns about the trend of automating their jobs, they also strongly felt it was inevitable. Despite these concerns, they remained optimistic about their future job security due to a view that the future of data science work will be a collaboration between humans and AI systems, in which both automation and human expertise are indispensable.
Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has been increasingly used in the implementation of advanced Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS). Research demonstrated the potential usefulness of AI-powered CDSS (AI-CDSS) in clinical decision making scenarios. However, post-adoption user perception and experience remain understudied, especially in developing countries. Through observations and interviews with 22 clinicians from 6 rural clinics in China, this paper reports the various tensions between the design of an AI-CDSS system (Brilliant Doctor) and the rural clinical context, such as the misalignment with local context and workflow, the technical limitations and usability barriers, as well as issues related to transparency and trustworthiness of AI-CDSS. Despite these tensions, all participants expressed positive attitudes toward the future of AI-CDSS, especially acting as a doctors AI assistant to realize a Human-AI Collaboration future in clinical settings. Finally we draw on our findings to discuss implications for designing AI-CDSS interventions for rural clinical contexts in developing countries.
To understand how end-users conceptualize consequences of cyber security attacks, we performed a card sorting study, a well-known technique in Cognitive Sciences, where participants were free to group the given consequences of chosen cyber attacks into as many categories as they wished using rationales they see fit. The results of the open card sorting study showed a large amount of inter-participant variation making the research team wonder how the consequences of security attacks were comprehended by the participants. As an exploration of whether it is possible to explain users mental model and behavior through Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques, the research team compared the card sorting data with the outputs of a number of Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques with the goal of understanding how participants perceived and interpreted the consequences of cyber attacks written in natural languages. The results of the NLP-based exploration methods revealed an interesting observation implying that participants had mostly employed checking individual keywords in each sentence to group cyber attack consequences together and less considered the semantics behind the description of consequences of cyber attacks. The results reported in this paper are seemingly useful and important for cyber attacks comprehension from users perspectives. To the best of our knowledge, this paper is the first introducing the use of AI techniques in explaining and modeling users behavior and their perceptions about a context. The novel idea introduced here is about explaining users using AI.
Organizations are rapidly deploying artificial intelligence (AI) systems to manage their workers. However, AI has been found at times to be unfair to workers. Unfairness toward workers has been associated with decreased worker effort and increased worker turnover. To avoid such problems, AI systems must be designed to support fairness and redress instances of unfairness. Despite the attention related to AI unfairness, there has not been a theoretical and systematic approach to developing a design agenda. This paper addresses the issue in three ways. First, we introduce the organizational justice theory, three different fairness types (distributive, procedural, interactional), and the frameworks for redressing instances of unfairness (retributive justice, restorative justice). Second, we review the design literature that specifically focuses on issues of AI fairness in organizations. Third, we propose a design agenda for AI fairness in organizations that applies each of the fairness types to organizational scenarios. Then, the paper concludes with implications for future research.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
