Are AI Ethics Conferences Different and More Diverse Compared to Traditional Computer Science Conferences?

Daniel Ernesto Acuna, Lizhen Liang
{"title":"Are AI Ethics Conferences Different and More Diverse Compared to Traditional Computer Science Conferences?","authors":"Daniel Ernesto Acuna, Lizhen Liang","doi":"10.1145/3461702.3462616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Even though computer science (CS) has had a historical lack of gender and race representation, its AI research affects everybody eventually. Being partially rooted in CS conferences, \"AI ethics\" (AIE) conferences such as FAccT and AIES have quickly become distinct venues where AI's societal implications are discussed and solutions proposed. However, it is largely unknown if these conferences improve upon the historical representational issues of traditional CS venues. In this work, we explore AIE conferences' evolution and compare them across demographic characteristics, publication content, and citation patterns. We find that AIE conferences have increased their internal topical diversity and impact on other CS conferences. Importantly, AIE conferences are highly differentiable, covering topics not represented in other venues. However, and perhaps contrary to the field's aspirations, white authors are more common while seniority and black researchers are represented similarly to CS venues. Our results suggest that AIE conferences could increase efforts to attract more diverse authors, especially considering their sizable roots in CS.","PeriodicalId":197336,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Even though computer science (CS) has had a historical lack of gender and race representation, its AI research affects everybody eventually. Being partially rooted in CS conferences, "AI ethics" (AIE) conferences such as FAccT and AIES have quickly become distinct venues where AI's societal implications are discussed and solutions proposed. However, it is largely unknown if these conferences improve upon the historical representational issues of traditional CS venues. In this work, we explore AIE conferences' evolution and compare them across demographic characteristics, publication content, and citation patterns. We find that AIE conferences have increased their internal topical diversity and impact on other CS conferences. Importantly, AIE conferences are highly differentiable, covering topics not represented in other venues. However, and perhaps contrary to the field's aspirations, white authors are more common while seniority and black researchers are represented similarly to CS venues. Our results suggest that AIE conferences could increase efforts to attract more diverse authors, especially considering their sizable roots in CS.
与传统的计算机科学会议相比,人工智能伦理会议不同吗?
尽管计算机科学(CS)在历史上一直缺乏性别和种族代表性,但其人工智能研究最终会影响到每个人。FAccT和AIES等“人工智能伦理”(AIE)会议部分植根于CS会议,已迅速成为讨论人工智能社会影响并提出解决方案的独特场所。然而,这些会议是否改善了传统CS场地的历史代表性问题,这在很大程度上是未知的。在这项工作中,我们探讨了AIE会议的演变,并比较了它们在人口统计学特征、出版内容和引用模式方面的差异。我们发现AIE会议增加了其内部主题多样性和对其他CS会议的影响。重要的是,AIE会议是高度可区分的,涵盖了在其他场所没有代表的主题。然而,也许与该领域的期望相反,白人作者更常见,而资历和黑人研究人员的代表与CS场所相似。我们的研究结果表明,AIE会议可以加大努力吸引更多不同的作者,特别是考虑到他们在CS领域的巨大根基。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信