AI & Society最新文献_第5页

Global governance and the normalization of artificial intelligence as ‘good’ for human health 全球治理和人工智能的正常化对人类健康“有益”

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-09-13 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01774-2

Michael Strange, Jason Tucker

引用次数: 1

Sculpting the social algorithm for radical futurity 为激进的未来塑造社会算法

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-09-13 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01760-8

Anisa Matthews

引用次数: 0

Digital sovereignty, digital infrastructures, and quantum horizons 数字主权、数字基础设施和量子视界

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-09-13 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01729-7

Geoff Gordon

{"title":"Digital sovereignty, digital infrastructures, and quantum horizons","authors":"Geoff Gordon","doi":"10.1007/s00146-023-01729-7","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01729-7","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article holds that governmental investments in quantum technologies speak to the imaginable futures of digital sovereignty and digital infrastructures, two major areas of change driven by related technologies like AI and Big Data, among other things, in international law today. Under intense development today for future interpolation into digital systems that they may alter, quantum technologies occupy a sort of liminal position, rooted in existing assemblages of computational technologies while pointing to new horizons for them. The possibilities they raise are neither certain nor determinate, but active investments in them (legal, political and material investments) offer perspective on digital technology-driven influences on an international legal imagination. In contributing to visions of the future that are guiding ambitions for digital sovereignty and digital infrastructures, quantum technologies condition digital technology-driven changes to international law and legal imagination in the present. Privileging observation and description, I adapt and utilize a diffractive method with the aim to discern what emerges out of the interference among the several related things assembled for this article, including material technologies and legal institutions. In conclusion, I observe ambivalent changes to an international legal imagination, changes which promise transformation but appear nonetheless to reproduce current distributions of power and resources.","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134990418","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Reimagining Benin Bronzes using generative adversarial networks 利用生成对抗网络重新想象贝宁青铜器

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-09-12 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01761-7

Minne Atairu

引用次数: 0

Social context of the issue of discriminatory algorithmic decision-making systems 社会背景下歧视性算法决策系统的问题

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-09-09 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01741-x

Daniel Varona, Juan Luis Suarez

引用次数: 0

Truth machines: synthesizing veracity in AI language models 真值机:人工智能语言模型的真实性合成

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-08-28 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01756-4

Luke Munn, Liam Magee, Vanicka Arora

引用次数: 2

From the eco-calypse to the infocalypse: the importance of building a new culture for protecting the infosphere 从生态启示录到信息启示录：建立保护信息圈的新文化的重要性

IF 2.9

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-08-26 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01737-7

Manh-Tung Ho, Hong-Kong To Nguyen

引用次数: 0

The privacy dependency thesis and self-defense 隐私依赖论和自卫

IF 2.9

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-08-19 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01734-w

Lauritz Aastrup Munch, Jakob Thrane Mainz

引用次数: 0

Coverage of well-being within artificial intelligence, machine learning and robotics academic literature: the case of disabled people 人工智能、机器学习和机器人学术文献中的福祉内容：残疾人案例

IF 2.9

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-08-16 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01735-9

Aspen Lillywhite, Gregor Wolbring

{"title":"Coverage of well-being within artificial intelligence, machine learning and robotics academic literature: the case of disabled people","authors":"Aspen Lillywhite, Gregor Wolbring","doi":"10.1007/s00146-023-01735-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00146-023-01735-9","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Well-being is an important policy concept including in discussions around the use of artificial intelligence, machine learning and robotics. Disabled people experience challenges in their well-being. Therefore, the aim of our scoping review study of academic abstracts employing Scopus, IEEE Xplore, Compendex and the 70 databases from EBSCO-HOST as sources was to better understand how academic literature focusing on AI/ML/robotics engages with well-being in relation to disabled people. Our objective was to answer the following research question: how and to what extent does the AI/ML/robot literature we covered include well-being in relation to disabled people? We found 2071 academic abstracts covering AI/ML and well-being, and 1055 covering robotics and well-being. Within these abstracts, only 39 covered AI/ML and 48 robotics and well-being in relation to disabled people. The tone of the coverage was techno-positive and techno-optimistic arguing that AI/ML/robotics could improve the well-being of disabled people in general or improve well-being by helping disabled people overcome their ‘disability’ or make tasks easier. No negative effects that AI/ML/robotics could have or has had on the well-being of disabled people were mentioned. Disabled people were portrayed only within patient, client, or user roles but not in their roles as stakeholders in the governance of AI/ML/robotics discussions. This biased and limited coverage of the impact of AI/ML/robotics on the well-being of disabled people disempowers disabled people.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"39 5","pages":"2537 - 2555"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125153956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Dancing with robots: acceptability of humanoid companions to reduce loneliness during COVID-19 (and beyond) 与机器人共舞：COVID-19（及以后）期间减少孤独感的仿人伴侣的可接受性

IF 2.9

AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-08-15 DOI: 10.1007/s00146-023-01738-6

Guy Moshe Ross

{"title":"Dancing with robots: acceptability of humanoid companions to reduce loneliness during COVID-19 (and beyond)","authors":"Guy Moshe Ross","doi":"10.1007/s00146-023-01738-6","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00146-023-01738-6","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The purpose of this research is to explore the acceptance of social robots as companions. Understanding what affects the acceptance of humanoid companions may give society tools that will help people overcome loneliness throughout pandemics, such as COVID-19 and beyond. Based on regulatory focus theory, it is proposed that there is a relationship between goal-directed motivation and acceptance of robots as companions. The theory of regulatory focus posits that goal-directed behavior is regulated by two motivational systems—promotion and prevention. People with a promotion focus are concerned about accomplishments, are sensitive to the presence and absence of positive outcomes (gains/non-gains), and have a strategic preference for eager means of goal-pursuit. People with a prevention focus are concerned about security and safety, are sensitive to the absence and presence of negative outcomes (non-losses/losses), and have a strategic preference for vigilant means. Two studies support the notion of a relationship between acceptance of robots as companions and regulatory focus. In Study 1, chronic promotion focus was associated with acceptance of robots, and this association was mediated by loneliness. The weaker the promotion focus, the stronger was the sense of loneliness, and thus the higher was the acceptance of the robots. In Study 2, a situationally induced regulatory focus moderated the association between acceptance of robots and COVID-19 perceived severity. The higher the perceived severity of the disease, the higher was the willingness to accept the robots, and the effect was stronger for an induced prevention (vs. promotion) focus. Models of acceptance of robots are presented. Implications for well-being are discussed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"39 5","pages":"2557 - 2568"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2023-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122074432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0