nach oben

Erschienen in:

2024 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

The Role of Human-Centered AI in User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization—Models, Frameworks, and Paradigms

verfasst von : Helma Torkamaan, Mohammad Tahaei, Stefan Buijsman, Ziang Xiao, Daricia Wilkinson, Bart P. Knijnenburg

Erschienen in: A Human-Centered Perspective of Intelligent Personalized Environments and Systems

Verlag: Springer Nature Switzerland

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This chapter explores the principles and frameworks of human-centered Artificial Intelligence (AI), specifically focusing on user modeling, adaptation, and personalization. It introduces a four-dimensional framework comprising paradigms, actors, values, and levels of realization that should be considered in the design of human-centered AI systems. This framework highlights a perspective-taking approach with four lenses of technology-centric, user-centric, human-centric, and future-centric perspectives. Ethical considerations, transparency, fairness, and accountability, among others, are highlighted as values when developing and deploying AI systems. The chapter further discusses the corresponding human values for each of these concepts. Opportunities and challenges in human-centered AI are examined, including the need for interdisciplinary collaboration and the complexity of addressing diverse perspectives. Human-centered AI provides valuable insights for designing AI systems that prioritize human needs, values, and experiences while considering ethical and societal implications.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Human Factors in User Modeling for Intelligent Systems

Nächstes Kapitel Fairness and Explainability for Enabling Trust in AI Systems

Note that the examples provided in this section are merely a few illustrations, and a comprehensive discussion of the various approaches, methods, evaluations, and resulting guidelines extends beyond the scope of this chapter. We have only presented a concise overview of one example per paradigm for brevity (for more details on privacy, see [68]).

Influencing Individually (2012) Fusing Personalization and Persuasion. ACM Trans Interactive Intell Syst 2(2):9:1–9:8. https://doi.org/10.1145/2209310.2209312

14:00-17:00: ISO/IEC TR 24027:2021 (2021). https://www.iso.org/standard/77607.html

Adadi A, Berrada M (2018) Peeking inside the black-box: a survey on explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). IEEE Access 6:52138–52160. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2870052. Conference Name: IEEE Access

Adam H, Balagopalan A, Alsentzer E, Christia F, Ghassemi M (2022) Mitigating the impact of biased artificial intelligence in emergency decision-making. Commun Med 2(1):1–6CrossRef

Adegun A, Viriri S (2021) Deep learning techniques for skin lesion analysis and melanoma cancer detection: a survey of state-of-the-art. Artif Intell Rev 54(2):811–841CrossRef

Aizenberg E, van den Hoven J (2020) Designing for human rights in AI. Big Data & Soc 7(2):2053951720949566CrossRef

Aljeraisy A, Barati M, Rana O, Perera C (2021) Privacy laws and privacy by design schemes for the internet of things: a developer’s perspective. ACM Comput Surv 54(5):102:1–102:38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3450965

Amershi S, Weld D, Vorvoreanu M, Fourney A, Nushi B, Collisson P, Suh J, Iqbal S, Bennett PN., Inkpen K, Teevan J, Kikin-Gil R, Horvitz E (2019) Guidelines for human-AI interaction. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, Glasgow Scotland, UK, pp 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300233

Ammitzbøll Flügge A, Hildebrandt T, Møller, NH (2021) Street-level algorithms and AI in bureaucratic decision-making: a caseworker perspective. Proc ACM Human-Comput Interaction 5(CSCW1):40:1–40:23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449114

10.

Axelsson M, Oliveira R, Racca M, Kyrki V (2021) Social robot co-design canvases: a participatory design framework. ACM Trans Human-Robot Interaction 11(1):3:1–3:39 (2021). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3472225

11.

Baeza-Yates R (2018) Bias on the web. Commun ACM 61(6):54–61CrossRef

12.

Barocas S, Hardt M, Narayanan A (2019) Fairness and machine learning: limitations and opportunities. fairmlbook.org

13.

Barth S, Ionita D, Hartel P (2022) Understanding online privacy-a systematic review of privacy visualizations and privacy by design guidelines. ACM Comput Surv 55(3):63:1–63:37. https://doi.org/10.1145/3502288

14.

Bender EM, Gebru T, McMillan-Major A, Shmitchell S (2021) On the dangers of stochastic parrots: can language models be too big? In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, FAccT ’21. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 610–623 https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922

15.

Berkovsky S, Taib R, Hijikata Y, Braslavsku P, Knijnenburg B (2018) A cross-cultural analysis of trust in recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 26th conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization, UMAP ’18. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 285–289. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209219.3209251. Event-place: Singapore, Singapore

16.

Binns R, Van Kleek M, Veale M, Lyngs U, Zhao J, Shadbolt N (2018) ’It’s reducing a human being to a percentage’: perceptions of justice in algorithmic decisions. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’18. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173951

17.

Black J, Roberts D, Stigall B, Michael I, Knijnenburg B (2023) Retiree volunteerism: automating “word of mouth” communication. In: third workshop on social and cultural integration with personalized interfaces (SOCIALIZE) 2023. Sydney, Australia

18.

Bollen D, Knijnenburg BP, Willemsen MC, Graus M (2010) Understanding choice overload in recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Recommender systems, pp 63–70. Barcelona, Spain. https://doi.org/10.1145/1864708.1864724

19.

Brayne S (2017) Big data surveillance: the case of policing. Am Sociol Rev 82(5):977–1008CrossRef

20.

Calvo RA, Peters D, Vold K, Ryan RM (2020) Supporting human autonomy in AI systems: a framework for ethical enquiry. In: Burr C, Floridi L (eds) Ethics of digital well-being: a multidisciplinary approach, Philosophical studies series. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 31–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50585-1_2

21.

Capel T, Brereton M () What is Human-Centered about Human-Centered AI? A Map of the Research Landscape. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’23, pp 1–23. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2023). 10.1145/3544548.3580959. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3580959

22.

Cavoukian A (2013) Privacy by design and the promise of smartdata. In: Harvey I, Cavoukian A, Tomko G, Borrett D, Kwan H, Hatzinakos D (eds) SmartData, pp 1–9. Springer, New York. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-6409-9_1

23.

Charmaz K (2014) Constructing grounded theory. SAGE. Google-Books-ID: v_GGAwAAQBAJ

24.

Chin JP, Diehl VA, Norman KL (1988) Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’88. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1145/57167.57203

25.

Commission E (2021) Proposal for a regulation of the European parliament and of the council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (artificial intelligence act) and amending certain union legislative acts (2021). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0206

26.

Cossins D (2018) Discriminating algorithms: 5 times AI showed prejudice. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2166207-discriminating-algorithms-5-times-ai-showed-prejudice/

27.

Deshpande A, Sharp H (2022) Responsible AI systems: who are the stakeholders? In: Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM conference on AI, ethics, and society, AIES ’22. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1145/3514094.3534187

28.

Dressel J, Farid H (2018) The accuracy, fairness, and limits of predicting recidivism. Sci Adv 4(1):eaao5580. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao5580. American Association for the Advancement of Science

29.

Edizel B, Bonchi F, Hajian S, Panisson A, Tassa T (2020) FaiRecSys: mitigating algorithmic bias in recommender systems. Int J Data Sci Anal 9(2):197–213CrossRef

30.

Ehsan U, Saha K, De Choudhury M, Riedl MO (2023) Charting the sociotechnical gap in explainable AI: a framework to address the gap in XAI. In: Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction 7(CSCW1):34:1–34:32. https://doi.org/10.1145/3579467

31.

Ekstrand MD, Das A, Burke R, Diaz F (2022) Fairness in information access systems. Found Trends® Inf Retrieval 16(1-2):1–177. 10.1561/1500000079. https://www.nowpublishers.com/article/Details/INR-079. Publisher: Now Publishers, Inc

32.

Ekstrand MD, Willemsen MC (2016) Behaviorism is not enough: better recommendations through listening to users. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on recommender systems, RecSys ’16. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 221–224. https://doi.org/10.1145/2959100.2959179. Event-place: Boston, Massachusetts, USA

33.

Enam MA, Srivastava S, Knijnenburg BP (2023) Designing a recommender system to recruit older adults for research studies. In: Third workshop on social and cultural integration with personalized interfaces (SOCIALIZE) 2023. Sydney, Australia

34.

Felzmann H, Fosch-Villaronga E, Lutz C, Tamò-Larrieux A (2020) Towards transparency by design for artificial intelligence. Sci Eng Ethics 26(6):3333–3361CrossRef

35.

Ferraro A, Serra X, Bauer C (2021) Break the loop: gender imbalance in music recommenders. In: Proceedings of the 2021 conference on human information interaction and retrieval, CHIIR ’21. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 249–254. https://doi.org/10.1145/3406522.3446033

36.

Ferwerda B, Hanbury A, Knijnenburg BP, Larsen B, Michiels L, Papenmeier A, Said A, Schaer P, Willemsen M (2023) Reality check - conducting real world studies: frontiers of information access experimentation for br research and education. Front Inf Access Exp Res Educ 13:20–40. Publisher: Schloss Dagstuhl- Leibniz-Zentrum fur Informatik GmbH, Dagstuhl Publishing

37.

Fitzsimons GJ, Lehmann DR (2004) Reactance to recommendations: when unsolicited advice yields contrary responses. Mark Sci 23(1):82–94CrossRef

38.

Flinn B, Maurer H (1995) Levels of anonymity. J Univ Comput Sci 1(1):35–47

39.

Floridi L, Cowls J, Beltrametti M, Chatila R, Chazerand P, Dignum V, Luetge C, Madelin R, Pagallo U, Rossi F, Schafer B, Valcke P, Vayena E (2018) AI4people-an ethical framework for a good AI society: opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Mind Mach 28(4):689–707CrossRef

40.

Floridi L, Holweg M, Taddeo M, Amaya Silva J, Mökander J, Wen Y (2022) capAI - A procedure for conducting conformity assessment of AI systems in line with the EU artificial intelligence Act. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4064091

41.

Frankena WK (1973) Intrinsic value and the good life. Ethics, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, INC., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp 79–95

42.

Friedman A, Knijnenburg BP, Vanhecke K, Martens L, Berkovsky S (2015) Privacy aspects of recommender systems. In: Ricci F, Rokach L, Shapira B (eds) Recommender systems handbook, 2 edn. Springer, US, pp 649–688. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4899-7637-6

43.

Friedman B, Kahn PH, Borning A, Huldtgren A (2013) Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Doorn N, Schuurbiers S, van de Poel V, Gorman ME (eds) Early engagement and new technologies: opening up the laboratory. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 55–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7844-3_4

44.

Gebru T, Morgenstern J, Vecchione B, Vaughan JW, Wallach H III, HD, Crawford K, (2021) Datasheets for datasets. Commun ACM 64(12):86–92

45.

Gilpin LH, Bau D, Yuan BZ, Bajwa A, Specter M, Kagal L (20118) Explaining explanations: An approach to evaluating interpretability of machine learning. arXiv:1806.00069 p 118. Publisher: CoRR

46.

GONZÁLEZ FUSTER G (2020) Artificial intelligence and law enforcement impact on fundamental rights. STUDY requested by the LIBE committee European Parliament PE 656.295, European Parliament, Brussels. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/656295/IPOL_STU(2020)656295_EN.pdf

47.

Gordon ML, Lam MS, Park JS, Patel K, Hancock J, Hashimoto T, Bernstein MS (2022) Jury learning: integrating dissenting voices into machine learning models. In: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’22. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502004

48.

Greene D, Hoffmann AL, Stark L (2019) Better, Nicer, Clearer, Fairer: a critical assessment of the movement for ethical artificial intelligence and machine learning. In: Hawaii international conference on system sciences 2019 (HICSS-52). https://aisel.aisnet.org/hicss-52/dsm/critical_and_ethical_studies/2

49.

Hevner A, Storey V (2023) Research challenges for the design of human-artificial intelligence systems (HAIS). ACM Trans Manag Inf Syst 14(1):10:1–10:18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3549547

50.

Hoffman LJ (1969) Computers and privacy: a survey. ACM Comput Surv 1(2):85–103CrossRef

51.

Holten Møller N, Shklovski I, Hildebrandt TT (2020) Shifting concepts of value: designing algorithmic decision-support systems for public services. In: Proceedings of the 11th nordic conference on human-computer interaction: shaping experiences, shaping society. ACM, Tallinn Estonia, pp 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3419249.3420149

52.

Holtzblatt K, Beyer H (2016) Contextual design: design for life, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam, Cambridge, MA

53.

van den Hoven J, Vermaas PE, van de Poel (2015) Design for values: an introduction. In: van den Hoven J, Vermaas PE, van de Poel I (eds) Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: sources, theory, values and application domains. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6970-0_40

54.

Howard A, Borenstein J (2018) The ugly truth about ourselves and our robot creations: the problem of bias and social inequity. Sci Eng Ethics 24(5):1521–1536CrossRef

55.

Huang C, Zhang Z, Mao B, Yao X (2022) An overview of artificial intelligence ethics. IEEE Trans Artif Intel 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAI.2022.3194503. Conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence

56.

Hull G (2015) Successful failure: what Foucault can teach us about privacy self-management in a world of Facebook and big data. Ethics Inf Technol 17(2):89–101MathSciNetCrossRef

57.

Humbert M, Trubert B, Huguenin K (2019) A survey on interdependent privacy. ACM Comput Surv 52(6):122:1–122:40. https://doi.org/10.1145/3360498

58.

Hutchinson B, Mitchell M (2019) 50 years of test (un)fairness: lessons for machine learning. In: Proceedings of the conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, FAT* ’19. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287600

59.

IEEE (2020) IEEE recommended practice for assessing the impact of autonomous and intelligent systems on human well-being. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/7010/7718/

60.

IEEE (2020) Recommended practice for organizational governance of artificial intelligence. https://standards.ieee.org

61.

Jakesch M, Buçinca Z, Amershi S, Olteanu A (2022) How different groups prioritize ethical values for responsible AI. In: 2022 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, FAccT ’22. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 310–323. https://doi.org/10.1145/3531146.3533097

62.

Jannach D, Adomavicius G (2016) Recommendations with a purpose. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on recommender systems, RecSys ’16. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 7–10 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2959100.2959186

63.

Jannach D, Manzoor A, Cai W, Chen L (2021) A survey on conversational recommender systems. ACM Comput Surv 54(5):105:1–105:36. https://doi.org/10.1145/3453154

64.

Kazim E, Koshiyama AS (2021) A high-level overview of AI ethics. Patterns (New York, N.Y.) 2(9):100314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100314

65.

Keegan BJ, Dennehy D, Naudé P (2022) Implementing artificial intelligence in traditional B2B marketing practices: an activity theory perspective. Inf Syst Front

66.

Knijnenburg BP, Hubig N (2020) Human-centric preference modeling for virtual agents. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on intelligent virtual agents, IVA ’20. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1145/3383652.3423909

67.

Knijnenburg BP, Jin H (2013) The persuasive effect of privacy recommendations. In: Twelfth annual workshop on HCI research in MIS. Milan, Italy. http://aisel.aisnet.org/sighci2013/16

68.

Knijnenburg BP, Page X, Wisniewski P, Lipford HR, Proferes N, Romano J (eds) Modern socio-technical perspectives on privacy. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82786-1. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/52825. Accepted: 2022-02-14T21:17:55Z

69.

Knijnenburg BP, Raybourn EM, Cherry D, Wilkinson D, Sivakumar S, Sloan H (2017) Death to the privacy calculus? https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2923806

70.

Knijnenburg BP, Reijmer NJ, Willemsen MC (2011) Each to his own: how different users call for different interaction methods in recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Recommender systems. ACM Press, Chicago, IL, pp 141–148. https://doi.org/10.1145/2043932.2043960

71.

Knijnenburg BP, Schmidt-Thieme L, Bollen DG (2010) Workshop on user-centric evaluation of recommender systems and their interfaces. In: Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Recommender systems, RecSys ’10. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 383–384. https://doi.org/10.1145/1864708.1864800

72.

Knijnenburg BP, Sivakumar S, Wilkinson D (2016) Recommender Systems for Self-Actualization. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on recommender systems, RecSys ’16. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 11–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/2959100.2959189

73.

Knijnenburg BP, Willemsen MC (2015) Evaluating recommender systems with user experiments. In: Ricci F, Rokach L, Shapira B (eds) Recommender systems handbook. Springer, US, pp 309–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7637-6_9

74.

Knijnenburg BP, Willemsen MC, Gantner Z, Soncu H, Newell C (2012) Explaining the user experience of recommender systems. User Model User-Adap Inter 22(4–5):441–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-011-9118-4CrossRef

75.

Kohavi R, Longbotham R, Sommerfield D, Henne RM (2009) Controlled experiments on the web: survey and practical guide. Data Min Knowl Disc 18(1):140–181MathSciNetCrossRef

76.

Konstan J, Terveen L (2021) Human-centered recommender systems: origins, advances, challenges, and opportunities. AI Mag 42(3):31–42

77.

Kumar Y, Gupta S, Singla R, Hu YC (2022) A systematic review of artificial intelligence techniques in cancer prediction and diagnosis. Arch Comput Methods Eng 29(4):2043–2070CrossRef

78.

Lam MS, Gordon ML, Metaxa D, Hancock JT, Landay JA, Bernstein MS (2022) End-user audits: a system empowering communities to lead large-scale investigations of harmful algorithmic behavior. Proc ACM on Human-Comput Interaction 6(CSCW2):512:1–512:34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555625

79.

Landers RN, Behrend TS (2023) Auditing the AI auditors: a framework for evaluating fairness and bias in high stakes AI predictive models. Am Psychol 78(1):36CrossRef

80.

Lehner OM, Knoll C, Leitner-Hanetseder S, Eisl C (2022) The dynamics of artificial intelligence in accounting organisations: a structuration perspective. In: The Routledge handbook of accounting information systems, pp 121–139. Routledge

81.

Lim BY, Dey AK, Avrahami D (2009) Why and why not explanations improve the intelligibility of context-aware intelligent systems. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 2119–2128

82.

Lindebaum D, Glaser V, Moser C, Ashraf M (2022) When algorithms rule, values can wither. MIT sloan management review (Winter 2023). https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/when-algorithms-rule-values-can-wither/

83.

Liu B, Ding M, Shaham S, Rahayu W, Farokhi F, Lin Z (2021) When machine learning meets privacy: a survey and outlook. ACM Comput Surv 54(2):31:1–31:36. https://doi.org/10.1145/3436755

84.

Matthews T, O’Leary K, Turner A, Sleeper M, Woelfer JP, Shelton M, Manthorne C, Churchill EF, Consolvo S (2017) Stories from survivors: privacy & security practices when coping with intimate partner abuse. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’17. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 2189–2201. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025875

85.

McGregor S (2020) Preventing repeated real world AI failures by cataloging incidents: the AI incident database. ArXiv:2011.08512 [cs], Database address.https://incidentdatabase.ai

86.

McNee SM, Albert I, Cosley D, Gopalkrishnan P, Lam SK, Rashid AM, Konstan JA, Riedl J (2002) On the recommending of citations for research papers. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work. New Orleans, LA, pp 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1145/587078.587096

87.

McNee SM, Riedl J, Konstan JA (2006) Being accurate is not enough: how accuracy metrics have hurt recommender systems. In: Extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. Montreal, Canada, pp 1097–1101. https://doi.org/10.1145/1125451.1125659

88.

McNee SM, Riedl J, Konstan JA (2006) Making recommendations better: an analytic model for human-recommender interaction. In: CHI ’06 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, CHI EA ’06. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1103–1108. https://doi.org/10.1145/1125451.1125660

89.

McQuillan D (2022) Resisting AI: an anti-fascist approach to artificial intelligence. Policy Press. Google-Books-ID: N6x6EAAAQBAJ

90.

Mehrabi N, Morstatter F, Saxena N, Lerman K, Galstyan A (2021) A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. ACM Comput Surv 54(6):115:1–115:3. https://doi.org/10.1145/3457607

91.

Michiels L, Leysen J, Smets A, Goethals B (2022) What are filter bubbles really? A review of the conceptual and empirical work. In: Adjunct proceedings of the 30th ACM conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 274–279. https://doi.org/10.1145/3511047.3538028

92.

Miller T (2019) Explanation in artificial intelligence: insights from the social sciences. Artif Intell 267:1–38MathSciNetCrossRef

93.

Mitchell M, Wu S, Zaldivar A, Barnes P, Vasserman L, Hutchinson B, Spitzer E, Raji ID, Gebru T (2019) Model cards for model reporting. In: Proceedings of the conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, FAT* ’19. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287596

94.

Mittelstadt BD, Allo P, Taddeo M, Wachter S, Floridi L (2016) The ethics of algorithms: mapping the debate. Big Data & Soc 3(2):2053951716679679CrossRef

95.

Mohseni S, Zarei N, Ragan ED (2021) A multidisciplinary survey and framework for design and evaluation of explainable AI systems. ACM Trans Interactive Intell Syst 11(3-4):24:1–24:45. https://doi.org/10.1145/3387166

96.

Muller M, Strohmayer A (2022) Forgetting practices in the data sciences. In: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’22. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517644

97.

Mökander J, Floridi L (2021) Ethics-based auditing to develop trustworthy AI. Mind Mach 31(2):323–327CrossRef

98.

Namara M, Sloan H, Knijnenburg BP (2022) The effectiveness of adaptation methods in improving user engagement and privacy protection on social network sites. In: Proceedings on privacy enhancing technologies. https://petsymposium.org/popets/2022/popets-2022-0031.php

99.

Newell A (1973) You can’t play 20 questions with nature and win: projective comments on the papers of this symposium. In: Chase W (ed) Visual information processing. Academic, Pittsburgh, PA

100.

Niraula D, Sun W, Jin J, Dinov ID, Cuneo K, Jamaluddin J, Matuszak MM, Luo Y, Lawrence TS, Jolly S, Ten Haken RK, El Naqa I (2023) A clinical decision support system for AI-assisted decision-making in response-adaptive radiotherapy (ARCliDS). Sci Rep 13(1):5279CrossRef

101.

Nunes I, Jannach D (2017) A systematic review and taxonomy of explanations in decision support and recommender systems. User Model User-Adapt Interaction 27:393–444. Publisher: Springer

102.

Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, Mullainathan S (2019) Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science 366(6464):447–453CrossRef

103.

Onuoha M (2018) Notes on algorithmic violence. Tech. rep. GitHub. https://githubcom/MimiOnuoha/On-Algorithmic-Violence

104.

Oviedo-Trespalacios O, Peden AE, Cole-Hunter T, Costantini A, Haghani M, Rod., J.E., Kelly S, Torkamaan H, Tariq A, Newton JDA, Gallagher T, Steinert S, Filtness A, Reniers G (2023) The risks of using ChatGPT to obtain common safety-related information and advice. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4346827

105.

Pham TC, Luong CM, Hoang VD, Doucet A (2021) AI outperformed every dermatologist in dermoscopic melanoma diagnosis, using an optimized deep-CNN architecture with custom mini-batch logic and loss function. Sci Rep 11(1):17485. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-96707-8. Number: 1 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

106.

van de Poel I (2021) Conflicting values in design for values design for values. In: van den Hoven J, Vermaas PE, van de Poel I (eds) Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: sources, theory, values and application domains. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6994-6_5-1

107.

van de Poel I (2021) Design for value change. Ethics Inf Technol 23(1):27–31CrossRef

108.

Pouloudi A (1997) Stakeholder analysis as a front-end to knowledge elicitation. AI & Soc 11(1):122–137CrossRef

109.

Proferes N (2022) The development of privacy norms. In: Knijnenburg BP, Page X, Wisniewski P, Lipford HR, Proferes N, Romano J (eds) Modern socio-technical perspectives on privacy. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82786-1_5

110.

Pu P, Chen L, Hu R (2011) A user-centric evaluation framework for recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Recommender systems, RecSys ’11. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA , pp 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1145/2043932.2043962

111.

Pu P, Chen L, Hu R (2012) Evaluating recommender systems from the user’s perspective: survey of the state of the art. User Model User-Adap Inter 22(4):317–355CrossRef

112.

Rahwan I, Cebrian M, Obradovich N, Bongard J, Bonnefon JF, Breazeal C, Crandall JW, Christakis NA, Couzin ID, Jackson MO, Jennings NR, Kamar E, Kloumann IM, Larochelle H, Lazer D, McElreath R, Mislove A, Parkes DC, Pentland A, Roberts ME, Shariff A, Tenenbaum JB, Wellman M (2019) Machine behaviour. Nature 568(7753):477–486CrossRef

113.

Raimondo GM, of Commerce, UD (2023) Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0). NIST. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1. Last Modified: 2023-03-30T12:25-04:00

114.

Raji ID, Smart A, White RN, Mitchell M, Gebru T, Hutchinson B, Smith-Loud J, Theron D, Barnes P (2020) Closing the AI accountability gap: defining an end-to-end framework for internal algorithmic auditing. In: Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, FAT* ’20. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372873

115.

Rajpurkar P, Chen E, Banerjee O, Topol EJ (2022) AI in health and medicine. Nat Med 28(1):31–38CrossRef

116.

Ribera M, Lapedriza A (2019) Can we do better explanations? A proposal of user-centered explainable AI. In: IUI workshops, vol 2327, p 38

117.

Riedl MO (2019) Human-centered artificial intelligence and machine learning. Hum Behav Emerg Technol 1(1):33–36CrossRef

118.

Rismani S, Shelby R, Smart A, Jatho E, Kroll J, Moon A, Rostamzadeh N (2023) From plane crashes to algorithmic harm: applicability of safety engineering frameworks for responsible ML. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’23. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581407

119.

Sankaran S, Markopoulos P (2021) "It’s like a puppet master": User perceptions of personal autonomy when interacting with intelligent technologies. In: Proceedings of the 29th ACM conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization, UMAP ’21. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 108–118. https://doi.org/10.1145/3450613.3456820

120.

Sankaran S, Zhang C, Funk M, Aarts H, Markopoulos P (2020) Do I have a say? Using conversational agents to re-imagine human-machine autonomy. In: Proceedings of the 2nd conference on conversational user interfaces, CUI ’20. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1145/3405755.3406135

121.

Sattlegger A, van den Hoven J, Bharosa N (2022) Designing for responsibility. In: DG.O 2022: The 23rd annual international conference on digital government research. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 214–225. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543434.3543581

122.

Schaub F, Balebako R, Durity AL, Cranor LF (2015) A design space for effective privacy notices, pp 1–17 (2015). https://www.usenix.org/conference/soups2015/proceedings/presentation/schaub

123.

Schedl M, Gómez E, Lex E (2023) Trustworthy algorithmic ranking systems. In: Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM international conference on web search and data mining, WSDM ’23. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1240–1243. https://doi.org/10.1145/3539597.3572723

124.

Scher S, Kopeinik S, Trügler A, Kowald D (2023) Modelling the long-term fairness dynamics of data-driven targeted help on job seekers. Sci Rep 13(1):1727CrossRef

125.

Schäfer H, Hors-Fraile S, Karumur RP, Calero Valdez A, Said A, Torkamaan H, Ulmer T, Trattner C (2017) Towards health (aware) recommender systems. In: Proceedings of the 2017 international conference on digital health, DH ’17. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 157–161 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3079452.3079499

126.

Septiandri AA, Constantinides M, Tahaei M, Quercia D (2023) WEIRD FAccTs: how western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic is FAccT? https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3593985. http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.06415. ArXiv:2305.06415 [cs]

127.

Seyyed-Kalantari L, Zhang H, McDermott MBA, Chen IY, Ghassemi M (2021) Underdiagnosis bias of artificial intelligence algorithms applied to chest radiographs in under-served patient populations. Nat Med 27(12):2176–2182CrossRef

128.

Shahbazi N, Lin Y, Asudeh A, Jagadish HV (2023) Representation bias in data: a survey on identification and resolution techniques. ACM Comput Surv

129.

Shahriari K, Shahriari M (2017) IEEE standard review - Ethically aligned design: A vision for prioritizing human wellbeing with artificial intelligence and autonomous systems. In: 2017 IEEE Canada international humanitarian technology conference (IHTC), pp 197–201 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/IHTC.2017.8058187

130.

Shani G, Gunawardana A (2011) Evaluating recommendation systems. In: Ricci F, Rokach L, Shapira B, Kantor PB (eds) Recommender systems handbook. Springer US, Boston, MA, pp 257–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-85820-3_8

131.

Shneiderman B (2020) Bridging the gap between ethics and practice: guidelines for reliable, safe, and trustworthy human-centered AI systems. ACM Trans Interactive Intell Syst 10(4):26:1–26:31 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3419764

132.

Shneiderman B (2020) Human-centered artificial intelligence: three fresh ideas. AIS Trans. Human-Comput. Interaction 12(3):109–124. https://doi.org/10.17705/1thci.00131. https://aisel.aisnet.org/thci/vol12/iss3/1

133.

Shneiderman B (2022) Human-centered AI. Oxford University Press. Google-Books-ID: YS9VEAAAQBAJ

134.

Shulner-Tal A, Kuflik T, Kliger D (2023) Enhancing Fairness Perception - Towards Human-Centred AI and Personalized Explanations Understanding the Factors Influencing Laypeople’s Fairness Perceptions of Algorithmic Decisions. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 39(7):1455–1482. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2095705 https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2095705. Publisher: Taylor & Francis_eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2095705

135.

Sinha P, Alsubhi A, Dash S, Guo L, P Knijnenburg B (2017) Shopping for clothes: from meeting individual needs to socializing. BCS Learning & Development. https://doi.org/10.14236/ewic/HCI2017.78

136.

Smuha NA (2019) The EU approach to ethics guidelines for trustworthy artificial intelligence. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3443537

137.

Subramonyam H, Seifert C, Adar E (2021) ProtoAI: model-informed prototyping for AI-powered interfaces. In: 26th international conference on intelligent user interfaces, IUI ’21. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/3397481.3450640

138.

Tahaei M, Abu-Salma R, Rashid A (2023) Stuck in the permissions with you: developer & end-user perspectives on app permissions & their privacy ramifications. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’23. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581060. Event-place: Hamburg, Germany

139.

Tahaei M, Ramokapane KM, Li T, Hong JI, Rashid A (2022) Charting app developers’ journey through privacy regulation features in ad networks. proceedings on privacy enhancing technologies. https://petsymposium.org/popets/2022/popets-2022-0061.php

140.

Tian Z, Cui L, Liang J, Yu S (2022) A comprehensive survey on poisoning attacks and countermeasures in machine learning. ACM Comput Surv 55(8):166:1–166:35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3551636

141.

Tintarev N, Masthoff J (2022) Beyond explaining single item recommendations. In: Ricci F, Rokach L, Shapira B (eds) Recommender systems handbook. Springer US, New York, NY, pp 711–756. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-2197-4_19

142.

Torkamaan H, Barbu CM, Ziegler J (2019) How can they know that? A study of factors affecting the creepiness of recommendations. In: Proceedings of the 13th ACM conference on recommender systems, RecSys ’19. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 423–427. https://doi.org/10.1145/3298689.3346982

143.

Torkamaan H, Ziegler J (2022) Recommendations as challenges: estimating required effort and user ability for health behavior change recommendations. In: 27th international conference on intelligent user interfaces, IUI ’22. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1145/3490099.3511118

144.

Toros H, Flaming D (2018) Prioritizing homeless assistance using predictive algorithms: an evidence-based approach. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3202479

145.

Torres R, McNee SM, Abel M, Konstan JA, Riedl J (2004) Enhancing digital libraries with TechLens+. In: Proceedings of the 2004 joint ACM/IEEE conference on Digital libraries. Tuscon, AZ, USA, p 228. https://doi.org/10.1145/996350.996402

146.

UNESCO (2021) The UNESCO recommendation on the ethics of AI: shaping the future of our societies. Tech. rep. https://www.unesco.nl/sites/default/files/inline-files/Unesco%20AI%20Brochure.pdf

147.

Urquhart L, Miranda D (2022) Policing faces: the present and future of intelligent facial surveillance. Inf Commun Technol Law 31(2):194–219CrossRef

148.

Veluwenkamp H, van den Hoven J (2023) Design for values and conceptual engineering. Ethics Inf Technol 25(1):2CrossRef

149.

Wang D, Yang Q, Abdul A, Lim BY (2019) Designing theory-driven user-centric explainable AI. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI ’19. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300831

150.

Wang Y, Ma W, Zhang M, Liu Y, Ma S (2023) A survey on the fairness of recommender systems. ACM Trans Inf Syst 41(3):52:1–52:43. https://doi.org/10.1145/3547333

151.

Whittlestone J, Nyrup R, Alexandrova A, Cave S (2019) The role and limits of principles in AI ethics: towards a focus on tensions. In: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM conference on AI, ethics, and society, AIES ’19. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314289

152.

Wilkinson D, Namara M, Patil K, Guo L, Manda A, Knijnenburg B (2021) The pursuit of transparency and control: a classification of ad explanations in social media (2021). https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2021.093

153.

Witten IH, Frank E, Hall MA, Pal CJ (2016) Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques. Morgan Kaufmann. Google-Books-ID: 1SylCgAAQBAJ

154.

Wong RY, Madaio MA, Merrill N (2023) Seeing like a toolkit: how toolkits envision the work of AI ethics. Proc ACM Human-Comput Interaction 7(CSCW1):145:1–145:27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3579621

155.

Xu W (2019) Toward human-centered AI: a perspective from human-computer interaction. Interactions 26(4):42–46CrossRef

156.

Yildirim N, Pushkarna M, Goyal N, Wattenberg M, Viégas F (2023) Investigating how practitioners use human-AI guidelines: a case study on the people + AI guidebook. ArXiv:2301.12243 [cs]

157.

Zaken MvA (2022) Impact assessment fundamental rights and algorithms - Report - Government.nl. https://www.government.nl/documents/reports/2022/03/31/impact-assessment-fundamental-rights-and-algorithms. Last Modified: 2022-06-17T13:38 Publisher: Ministerie van Algemene Zaken

158.

Zicari RV, Brodersen J, Brusseau J, Düdder B, Eichhorn T, Ivanov T, Kararigas G, Kringen P, McCullough M, Möslein F, Mushtaq N, Roig G, Stürtz N, Tolle K, Tithi JJ, van Halem I, Westerlund M (2021) Z-Inspection: a process to assess trustworthy AI. IEEE Trans Technol Soc 2(2):83–97. https://doi.org/10.1109/TTS.2021.3066209. Conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society

159.

Zytko D, Wisniewski JP, Guha S, P S Baumer E, Lee MK (2022) Participatory design of AI systems: opportunities and challenges across diverse users, relationships, and application domains. In: Extended abstracts of the 2022 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI EA ’22. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3516506

Titel: The Role of Human-Centered AI in User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization—Models, Frameworks, and Paradigms
verfasst von: Helma Torkamaan
Mohammad Tahaei
Stefan Buijsman
Ziang Xiao
Daricia Wilkinson
Bart P. Knijnenburg
Verlag: Springer Nature Switzerland
Buch: A Human-Centered Perspective of Intelligent Personalized Environments and Systems
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-55108-6

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-031-55109-3

Copyright-Jahr: 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-55109-3_2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"