Search for: All records

Ethical concerns around AI have increased emphasis on model auditing and reporting requirements. We thoroughly review the current state of governance and evaluation prac- tices to identify specific challenges to responsible AI devel- opment in OSS. We then analyze OSS projects to understand if model evaluation is associated with safety assessments, through documentation of limitations, biases, and other risks. Our analysis of 7902 Hugging Face projects found that while risk documentation is strongly associated with evaluation practices, high performers from the platform’s largest com- petitive leaderboard (N=789) were less accountable. Recog- nizing these delicate tensions from performance incentives may guide providers in revisiting the objectives of evaluation and legal scholars in formulating platform interventions and policies that balance innovation and responsibility. 

Tech users currently have limited ability to act on concerns regarding the negative societal impacts of large tech companies. However, recent work suggests that users can exert leverage using their role in the generation of valuable data, for instance by withholding their data contributions to intelligent technologies. We propose and evaluate a new means to exert this type of leverage against tech companies: "conscious data contribution" (CDC). Users who participate in CDC exert leverage against a target tech company by contributing data to technologies operated by a competitor of that company. Using simulations, we find that CDC could be highly effective at reducing the gap in intelligent technologies performance between an incumbent and their competitors. In some cases, just 20% of users contributing data they have produced to a small competitor could help that competitor get 80% of the way towards the original company's best-case performance. We discuss the implications of CDC for policymakers, tech designers, and researchers. 

A growing body of work has highlighted the important role that Wikipedia's volunteer-created content plays in helping search engines achieve their core goal of addressing the information needs of hundreds of millions of people. In this paper, we report the results of an investigation into the incidence of Wikipedia links in search engine results pages (SERPs). Our results extend prior work by considering three U.S. search engines, simulating both mobile and desktop devices, and using a spatial analysis approach designed to study modern SERPs that are no longer just "ten blue links". We find that Wikipedia links are extremely common in important search contexts, appearing in 67-84% of desktop SERPs for common and trending queries, but less often for medical queries. Furthermore, we observe that Wikipedia links often appear in "Knowledge Panel" SERP elements and are in positions visible to users without scrolling, although Wikipedia appears less often and in less prominent positions on mobile devices. Our findings reinforce the complementary notions that (1) Wikipedia content and research has major impact outside of the Wikipedia domain and (2) powerful technologies like search engines are highly reliant on free content created by volunteers. 

The public is increasingly concerned about the practices of large technology companies with regards to privacy and many other issues. To force changes in these practices, there have been growing calls for “data strikes.” These new types of collective action would seek to create leverage for the public by starving business-critical models (e.g. recommender systems, ranking algorithms) of much-needed training data. However, little is known about how data strikes would work, let alone how effective they would be. Focusing on the important commercial domain of recommender systems, we simulate data strikes under a wide variety of conditions and explore how they can augment traditional boycotts. Our results suggest that data strikes can be effective and that users have more power in their relationship with technology companies than they do with other companies. However, our results also highlight important trade-offs and challenges that must be considered by potential organizers. 

Search engines are some of the most popular and profitable intelligent technologies in existence. Recent research, however, has suggested that search engines may be surprisingly dependent on user-created content like Wikipedia articles to address user information needs. In this paper, we perform a rigorous audit of the extent to which Google leverages Wikipedia and other user-generated content to respond to queries. Analyzing results for six types of important queries (e.g. most popular, trending, expensive advertising), we observe that Wikipedia appears in over 80% of results pages for some query types and is by far the most prevalent individual content source across all query types. More generally, our results provide empirical information to inform a nascent but rapidly-growing debate surrounding a highly consequential question: Do users provide enough value to intelligent technologies that they should receive more of the economic benefits from intelligent technologies?