OECD Report: “The swift evolution of AI technologies calls for policymakers to consider and proactively manage AI-driven change. The OECD’s Expert Group on AI Futures was established to help meet this need and anticipate AI developments and their potential impacts. Informed by insights from the Expert Group, this report distils research and expert insights on prospective AI benefits, risks and policy imperatives. It identifies ten priority benefits, such as accelerated scientific progress, productivity gains and better sense-making and forecasting. It discusses ten priority risks, such as facilitation of increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks; manipulation, disinformation, fraud and resulting harms to democracy; concentration of power; incidents in critical systems and exacerbated inequality and poverty. Finally, it points to ten policy priorities, including establishing clearer liability rules, drawing AI “red lines”, investing in AI safety and ensuring adequate risk management procedures. The report reviews existing public policy and governance efforts and remaining gaps…(More)”.
Human-AI coevolution
Paper by Dino Pedreschi et al: “Human-AI coevolution, defined as a process in which humans and AI algorithms continuously influence each other, increasingly characterises our society, but is understudied in artificial intelligence and complexity science literature. Recommender systems and assistants play a prominent role in human-AI coevolution, as they permeate many facets of daily life and influence human choices through online platforms. The interaction between users and AI results in a potentially endless feedback loop, wherein users’ choices generate data to train AI models, which, in turn, shape subsequent user preferences. This human-AI feedback loop has peculiar characteristics compared to traditional human-machine interaction and gives rise to complex and often “unintended” systemic outcomes. This paper introduces human-AI coevolution as the cornerstone for a new field of study at the intersection between AI and complexity science focused on the theoretical, empirical, and mathematical investigation of the human-AI feedback loop. In doing so, we: (i) outline the pros and cons of existing methodologies and highlight shortcomings and potential ways for capturing feedback loop mechanisms; (ii) propose a reflection at the intersection between complexity science, AI and society; (iii) provide real-world examples for different human-AI ecosystems; and (iv) illustrate challenges to the creation of such a field of study, conceptualising them at increasing levels of abstraction, i.e., scientific, legal and socio-political…(More)”.
What is ‘sovereign AI’ and why is the concept so appealing (and fraught)?
Article by John Letzing: “Denmark unveiled its own artificial intelligence supercomputer last month, funded by the proceeds of wildly popular Danish weight-loss drugs like Ozempic. It’s now one of several sovereign AI initiatives underway, which one CEO believes can “codify” a country’s culture, history, and collective intelligence – and become “the bedrock of modern economies.”
That particular CEO, Jensen Huang, happens to run a company selling the sort of chips needed to pursue sovereign AI – that is, to construct a domestic vintage of the technology, informed by troves of homegrown data and powered by the computing infrastructure necessary to turn that data into a strategic reserve of intellect…
It’s not surprising that countries are forging expansive plans to put their own stamp on AI. But big-ticket supercomputers and other costly resources aren’t feasible everywhere.
Training a large language model has gotten a lot more expensive lately; the funds required for the necessary hardware, energy, and staff may soon top $1 billion. Meanwhile, geopolitical friction over access to the advanced chips necessary for powerful AI systems could further warp the global playing field.
Even for countries with abundant resources and access, there are “sovereignty traps” to consider. Governments pushing ahead on sovereign AI could risk undermining global cooperation meant to ensure the technology is put to use in transparent and equitable ways. That might make it a lot less safe for everyone.
An example: a place using AI systems trained on a local set of values for its security may readily flag behaviour out of sync with those values as a threat…(More)”.
Code and Craft: How Generative Ai Tools Facilitate Job Crafting in Software Development
Paper by Leonie Rebecca Freise et al: “The rapid evolution of the software development industry challenges developers to manage their diverse tasks effectively. Traditional assistant tools in software development often fall short of supporting developers efficiently. This paper explores how generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools, such as Github Copilot or ChatGPT, facilitate job crafting—a process where employees reshape their jobs to meet evolving demands. By integrating GAI tools into workflows, software developers can focus more on creative problem-solving, enhancing job satisfaction, and fostering a more innovative work environment. This study investigates how GAI tools influence task, cognitive, and relational job crafting behaviors among software developers, examining its implications for professional growth and adaptability within the industry. The paper provides insights into the transformative impacts of GAI tools on software development job crafting practices, emphasizing their role in enabling developers to redefine their job functions…(More)”.
AI Analysis of Body Camera Videos Offers a Data-Driven Approach to Police Reform
Article by Ingrid Wickelgren: But unless something tragic happens, body camera footage generally goes unseen. “We spend so much money collecting and storing this data, but it’s almost never used for anything,” says Benjamin Graham, a political scientist at the University of Southern California.
Graham is among a small number of scientists who are reimagining this footage as data rather than just evidence. Their work leverages advances in natural language processing, which relies on artificial intelligence, to automate the analysis of video transcripts of citizen-police interactions. The findings have enabled police departments to spot policing problems, find ways to fix them and determine whether the fixes improve behavior.
Only a small number of police agencies have opened their databases to researchers so far. But if this footage were analyzed routinely, it would be a “real game changer,” says Jennifer Eberhardt, a Stanford University psychologist, who pioneered this line of research. “We can see beat-by-beat, moment-by-moment how an interaction unfolds.”
In papers published over the past seven years, Eberhardt and her colleagues have examined body camera footage to reveal how police speak to white and Black people differently and what type of talk is likely to either gain a person’s trust or portend an undesirable outcome, such as handcuffing or arrest. The findings have refined and enhanced police training. In a study published in PNAS Nexus in September, the researchers showed that the new training changed officers’ behavior…(More)”.
Operational Learning
International Red Cross: “Operational learning in emergencies is the lesson learned from managing and dealing with crises, refining protocols for resource allocation, decision-making, communication strategies, and others. The summaries are generated using AI and Large Language Models, based on data coming from Final DREF Reports, Emergency Appeal reports and others…(More)”
The history of AI and power in government
Book chapter by Shirley Kempeneer: “…begins by examining the simultaneous development of statistics and the state. Drawing on the works of notable scholars like Alain Desrosières, Theodore Porter, James Scott, and Michel Foucault, the chapter explores measurement as a product of modernity. It discusses the politics and power of (large) numbers, through their ability to make societies legible and controllable, also in the context of colonialism. The chapter then discusses the shift from data to big data and how AI and the state, just like statistics and the state, are mutually constitutive. It zooms in on shifting power relations, discussing the militarization of society, the outsourcing of the state to tech contractors, the exploitation of human bodies under the guise of ‘automation’, and the oppression of vulnerable citizens. Where news media often focus on the power of AI, that is supposedly escaping our control, this chapter relocates power in AI-systems, building on the work of Kate Crawford, Bruno Latour, and Emily Bender…(More)”
Artificial Intelligence, Scientific Discovery, and Product Innovation
Paper by Aidan Toner-Rodgers: “… studies the impact of artificial intelligence on innovation, exploiting the randomized introduction of a new materials discovery technology to 1,018 scientists in the R&D lab of a large U.S. firm. AI-assisted researchers discover 44% more materials, resulting in a 39% increase in patent filings and a 17% rise in downstream product innovation. These compounds possess more novel chemical structures and lead to more radical inventions. However, the technology has strikingly disparate effects across the productivity distribution: while the bottom third of scientists see little benefit, the output of top researchers nearly doubles. Investigating the mechanisms behind these results, I show that AI automates 57% of “idea-generation” tasks, reallocating researchers to the new task of evaluating model-produced candidate materials. Top scientists leverage their domain knowledge to prioritize promising AI suggestions, while others waste significant resources testing false positives. Together, these findings demonstrate the potential of AI-augmented research and highlight the complementarity between algorithms and expertise in the innovative process. Survey evidence reveals that these gains come at a cost, however, as 82% of scientists report reduced satisfaction with their work due to decreased creativity and skill underutilization…(More)”.
Voice and Access in AI: Global AI Majority Participation in Artificial Intelligence Development and Governance
Paper by Sumaya N. Adan et al: “Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly emerging as one of the most transformative technologies in human history, with the potential to profoundly impact all aspects of society globally. However, access to AI and participation in its development and governance is concentrated among a few countries with advanced AI capabilities, while the ‘Global AI Majority’ – defined as the population of countries primarily encompassing Africa, Latin America, South and Southeast Asia, and parts of Eastern Europe – is largely excluded. These regions, while diverse, share common challenges in accessing and influencing advanced AI technologies.
This white paper investigates practical remedies to increase voice in and access to AI governance and capabilities for the Global AI Majority, while addressing the security and commercial concerns of frontier AI states. We examine key barriers facing the Global AI Majority, including limited access to digital and compute infrastructure, power concentration in AI development, Anglocentric data sources, and skewed talent distributions. The paper also explores the dual-use dilemma of AI technologies and how it motivates frontier AI states to implement restrictive policies.
We evaluate a spectrum of AI development initiatives, ranging from domestic model creation to structured access to deployed models, assessing their feasibility for the Global AI Majority. To resolve governance dilemmas, we propose three key approaches: interest alignment, participatory architecture, and safety assurance…(More)”.
The Rise of AI-Generated Content in Wikipedia
Paper by Creston Brooks, Samuel Eggert, and Denis Peskoff: “The rise of AI-generated content in popular information sources raises significant concerns about accountability, accuracy, and bias amplification. Beyond directly impacting consumers, the widespread presence of this content poses questions for the long-term viability of training language models on vast internet sweeps. We use GPTZero, a proprietary AI detector, and Binoculars, an open-source alternative, to establish lower bounds on the presence of AI-generated content in recently created Wikipedia pages. Both detectors reveal a marked increase in AI-generated content in recent pages compared to those from before the release of GPT-3.5. With thresholds calibrated to achieve a 1% false positive rate on pre-GPT-3.5 articles, detectors flag over 5% of newly created English Wikipedia articles as AI-generated, with lower percentages for German, French, and Italian articles. Flagged Wikipedia articles are typically of lower quality and are often self-promotional or partial towards a specific viewpoint on controversial topics…(More)”