An official website of the United States government
Social service providers play a vital role in the developmental outcomes of underprivileged youth as they transition into adulthood. Educators, mental health professionals, juvenile justice officers, and child welfare caseworkers often have first-hand knowledge of the trials uniquely faced by these vulnerable youth and are charged with mitigating harmful risks, such as mental health challenges, child abuse, drug use, and sex trafficking. Yet, less is known about whether or how social service providers assess and mitigate the online risk experiences of youth under their care. Therefore, as part of the National Science Foundation (NSF) I-Corps program, we conducted interviews with 37 social service providers (SSPs) who work with underprivileged youth to determine what (if any) online risks are most concerning to them given their role in youth protection, how they assess or become aware of these online risk experiences, and whether they see value in the possibility of using artificial intelligence (AI) as a potential solution for online risk detection. Overall, online sexual risks (e.g., sexual grooming and abuse) and cyberbullying were the most salient concern across all social service domains, especially when these experiences crossed the boundary between the digital and the physical worlds. Yet, SSPs had to rely heavily on youth self-reports to know whether and when online risks occurred, which required building a trusting relationship with youth; otherwise, SSPs became aware only after a formal investigation had been launched. Therefore, most SSPs found value in the potential for using AI as an early detection system and to monitor youth, but they were concerned that such a solution would not be feasible due to a lack of resources to adequately respond to online incidences, access to the necessary digital trace data (e.g., social media), context, and concerns about violating the trust relationships they built with youth. Thus, such automated risk detection systems should be designed and deployed with caution, as their implementation could cause youth to mistrust adults, thereby limiting the receipt of necessary guidance and support. We add to the bodies of research on adolescent online safety and the benefits and challenges of leveraging algorithmic systems in the public sector.
more »
« less
Generative AI models should include detection mechanisms as a condition for public release
Abstract The new wave of ‘foundation models’—general-purpose generative AI models, for production of text (e.g., ChatGPT) or images (e.g., MidJourney)—represent a dramatic advance in the state of the art for AI. But their use also introduces a range of new risks, which has prompted an ongoing conversation about possible regulatory mechanisms. Here we propose a specific principle that should be incorporated into legislation: that any organization developing a foundation model intended for public use must demonstrate a reliabledetection mechanismfor the content it generates, as a condition of its public release. The detection mechanism should be made publicly available in a tool that allows users to query, for an arbitrary item of content, whether the item was generated (wholly or partly) by the model. In this paper, we argue that this requirement is technically feasible and would play an important role in reducing certain risks from new AI models in many domains. We also outline a number of options for the tool’s design, and summarize a number of points where further input from policymakers and researchers would be required.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2229876
- PAR ID:
- 10524776
- Publisher / Repository:
- Ethics and Information Technology
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Ethics and Information Technology
- Volume:
- 25
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 1388-1957
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
AbstractRecent advances in generative artificial intelligence (AI) and multimodal learning analytics (MMLA) have allowed for new and creative ways of leveraging AI to support K12 students' collaborative learning in STEM+C domains. To date, there is little evidence of AI methods supporting students' collaboration in complex, open‐ended environments. AI systems are known to underperform humans in (1) interpreting students' emotions in learning contexts, (2) grasping the nuances of social interactions and (3) understanding domain‐specific information that was not well‐represented in the training data. As such, combined human and AI (ie, hybrid) approaches are needed to overcome the current limitations of AI systems. In this paper, we take a first step towards investigating how a human‐AI collaboration between teachers and researchers using an AI‐generated multimodal timeline can guide and support teachers' feedback while addressing students' STEM+C difficulties as they work collaboratively to build computational models and solve problems. In doing so, we present a framework characterizing the human component of our human‐AI partnership as a collaboration between teachers and researchers. To evaluate our approach, we present our timeline to a high school teacher and discuss the key insights gleaned from our discussions. Our case study analysis reveals the effectiveness of an iterative approach to using human‐AI collaboration to address students' STEM+C challenges: the teacher can use the AI‐generated timeline to guide formative feedback for students, and the researchers can leverage the teacher's feedback to help improve the multimodal timeline. Additionally, we characterize our findings with respect to two events of interest to the teacher: (1) when the students cross adifficulty threshold,and (2) thepoint of intervention, that is, when the teacher (or system) should intervene to provide effective feedback. It is important to note that the teacher explained that there should be a lag between (1) and (2) to give students a chance to resolve their own difficulties. Typically, such a lag is not implemented in computer‐based learning environments that provide feedback. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topicCollaborative, open‐ended learning environments enhance students' STEM+C conceptual understanding and practice, but they introduce additional complexities when students learn concepts spanning multiple domains.Recent advances in generative AI and MMLA allow for integrating multiple datastreams to derive holistic views of students' states, which can support more informed feedback mechanisms to address students' difficulties in complex STEM+C environments.Hybrid human‐AI approaches can help address collaborating students' STEM+C difficulties by combining the domain knowledge, emotional intelligence and social awareness of human experts with the general knowledge and efficiency of AI.What this paper addsWe extend a previous human‐AI collaboration framework using a hybrid intelligence approach to characterize the human component of the partnership as a researcher‐teacher partnership and present our approach as a teacher‐researcher‐AI collaboration.We adapt an AI‐generated multimodal timeline to actualize our human‐AI collaboration by pairing the timeline with videos of students encountering difficulties, engaging in active discussions with a high school teacher while watching the videos to discern the timeline's utility in the classroom.From our discussions with the teacher, we define two types ofinflection pointsto address students' STEM+C difficulties—thedifficulty thresholdand theintervention point—and discuss how thefeedback latency intervalseparating them can inform educator interventions.We discuss two ways in which our teacher‐researcher‐AI collaboration can help teachers support students encountering STEM+C difficulties: (1) teachers using the multimodal timeline to guide feedback for students, and (2) researchers using teachers' input to iteratively refine the multimodal timeline.Implications for practice and/or policyOur case study suggests that timeline gaps (ie, disengaged behaviour identified by off‐screen students, pauses in discourse and lulls in environment actions) are particularly important for identifying inflection points and formulating formative feedback.Human‐AI collaboration exists on a dynamic spectrum and requires varying degrees of human control and AI automation depending on the context of the learning task and students' work in the environment.Our analysis of this human‐AI collaboration using a multimodal timeline can be extended in the future to support students and teachers in additional ways, for example, designing pedagogical agents that interact directly with students, developing intervention and reflection tools for teachers, helping teachers craft daily lesson plans and aiding teachers and administrators in designing curricula.more » « less
-
Abstract How do people come to opposite causal judgments about societal problems, such as whether a public health policy reduced COVID‐19 cases? The current research tests an understudied cognitive mechanism in which people may agree about whatactuallyhappened (e.g., that a public health policy was implemented and COVID‐19 cases declined), but can be made to disagree about the counterfactual, or whatwould havehappened otherwise (e.g., whether COVID‐19 cases would have declined naturally without intervention) via comparison cases. Across two preregistered studies (totalN= 480), participants reasoned about the implementation of a public policy that was followed by an immediate decline in novel virus cases. Study 1 shows that people's judgments about the causal impact of the policy could be pushed in opposite directions by emphasizing comparison cases that imply different counterfactual outcomes. Study 2 finds that people recognize they can use such information to influence others. Specifically, in service of persuading others to support or reject a public health policy, people systematically showed comparison cases implying the counterfactual outcome that aligned with their position. These findings were robust across samples of U.S. college students and politically and socioeconomically diverse U.S. adults. Together, these studies suggest that implied counterfactuals are a powerful tool that individuals can use to manufacture others’ causal judgments and warrant further investigation as a mechanism contributing to belief polarization.more » « less
-
Foundation models (FMs) provide societal benefits but also amplify risks. Governments, companies, and researchers have proposed regulatory frameworks, acceptable use policies, and safety benchmarks in response. However, existing public benchmarks often define safety categories based on previous literature, intuitions, or common sense, leading to disjointed sets of categories for risks specified in recent regulations and policies, which makes it challenging to evaluate and compare FMs across these benchmarks. To bridge this gap, we introduce AIR-BENCH 2024, the first AI safety benchmark for language models aligned with emerging government regulations and company policies, following the regulation-based safety categories grounded in the AI risks taxonomy, AIR 2024. AIR 2024 decomposes 8 government regulations and 16 company policies into a four-tiered safety taxonomy with 314 granular risk categories in the lowest tier. AIR-BENCH 2024 contains 5,694 diverse prompts spanning these categories, with manual curation and human auditing to ensure quality. We evaluate leading language models on AIR-BENCH 2024, uncovering insights into their alignment with specified safety concerns. By bridging the gap between public benchmarks and practical AI risks, AIR-BENCH 2024 provides a foundation for assessing model safety across jurisdictions, fostering the development of safer and more responsible AI systems.more » « less
-
Summary The iconic, palmately compound leaves ofCannabishave attracted significant attention in the past. However, investigations into the genetic basis of leaf shape or its connections to phytochemical composition have yielded inconclusive results. This is partly due to prominent changes in leaflet number within a single plant during development, which has so far prevented the proper use of common morphometric techniques.Here, we present a new method that overcomes the challenge of nonhomologous landmarks in palmate, pinnate, and lobed leaves, usingCannabisas an example. We model corresponding pseudo‐landmarks for each leaflet as angle‐radius coordinates and model them as a function of leaflet to create continuous polynomial models, bypassing the problems associated with variable number of leaflets between leaves.We analyze 341 leaves from 24 individuals from nineCannabisaccessions. Using 3591 pseudo‐landmarks in modeled leaves, we accurately predict accession identity, leaflet number, and relative node number.Intra‐leaf modeling offers a rapid, cost‐effective means of identifyingCannabisaccessions, making it a valuable tool for future taxonomic studies, cultivar recognition, and possibly chemical content analysis and sex identification, in addition to permitting the morphometric analysis of leaves in any species with variable numbers of leaflets or lobes.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09728-4
