Refine
Departments, institutes and facilities
Document Type
- Conference Object (6)
- Article (5)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Year of publication
- 2022 (13) (remove)
Keywords
- GDPR (2)
- Backorder prediction (1)
- Biometric data (1)
- CNN (1)
- Data literacy (1)
- Data protection by design (1)
- Digital Energy Management (1)
- Digital Plumbing (1)
- Digitaler Verbraucherschutz (1)
- Effective purpose specification (1)
Technological objects present themselves as necessary, only to become obsolete faster than ever before. This phenomenon has led to a population that experiences a plethora of technological objects and interfaces as they age, which become associated with certain stages of life and disappear thereafter. Noting the expanding body of literature within HCI about appropriation, our work pinpoints an area that needs more attention, “outdated technologies.” In other words, we assert that design practices can profit as much from imaginaries of the future as they can from reassessing artefacts from the past in a critical way. In a two-week fieldwork with 37 HCI students, we gathered an international collection of nostalgic devices from 14 different countries to investigate what memories people still have of older technologies and the ways in which these memories reveal normative and accidental use of technological objects. We found that participants primarily remembered older technologies with positive connotations and shared memories of how they had adapted and appropriated these technologies, rather than normative uses. We refer to this phenomenon as nostalgic reminiscence. In the future, we would like to develop this concept further by discussing how nostalgic reminiscence can be operationalized to stimulate speculative design in the present.
While the recent discussion on Art. 25 GDPR often considers the approach of data protection by design as an innovative idea, the notion of making data protection law more effective through requiring the data controller to implement the legal norms into the processing design is almost as old as the data protection debate. However, there is another, more recent shift in establishing the data protection by design approach through law, which is not yet understood to its fullest extent in the debate. Art. 25 GDPR requires the controller to not only implement the legal norms into the processing design but to do so in an effective manner. By explicitly declaring the effectiveness of the protection measures to be the legally required result, the legislator inevitably raises the question of which methods can be used to test and assure such efficacy. In our opinion, extending the legal compatibility assessment to the real effects of the required measures opens this approach to interdisciplinary methodologies. In this paper, we first summarise the current state of research on the methodology established in Art. 25 sect. 1 GDPR, and pinpoint some of the challenges of incorporating interdisciplinary research methodologies. On this premise, we present an empirical research methodology and first findings which offer one approach to answering the question on how to specify processing purposes effectively. Lastly, we discuss the implications of these findings for the legal interpretation of Art. 25 GDPR and related provisions, especially with respect to a more effective implementation of transparency and consent, and provide an outlook on possible next research steps.
Due to expected positive impacts on business, the application of artificial intelligence has been widely increased. The decision-making procedures of those models are often complex and not easily understandable to the company’s stakeholders, i.e. the people having to follow up on recommendations or try to understand automated decisions of a system. This opaqueness and black-box nature might hinder adoption, as users struggle to make sense and trust the predictions of AI models. Recent research on eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) focused mainly on explaining the models to AI experts with the purpose of debugging and improving the performance of the models. In this article, we explore how such systems could be made explainable to the stakeholders. For doing so, we propose a new convolutional neural network (CNN)-based explainable predictive model for product backorder prediction in inventory management. Backorders are orders that customers place for products that are currently not in stock. The company now takes the risk to produce or acquire the backordered products while in the meantime, customers can cancel their orders if that takes too long, leaving the company with unsold items in their inventory. Hence, for their strategic inventory management, companies need to make decisions based on assumptions. Our argument is that these tasks can be improved by offering explanations for AI recommendations. Hence, our research investigates how such explanations could be provided, employing Shapley additive explanations to explain the overall models’ priority in decision-making. Besides that, we introduce locally interpretable surrogate models that can explain any individual prediction of a model. The experimental results demonstrate effectiveness in predicting backorders in terms of standard evaluation metrics and outperform known related works with AUC 0.9489. Our approach demonstrates how current limitations of predictive technologies can be addressed in the business domain.
Der technische Fortschritt im Bereich der Erhebung, Speicherung und Verarbeitung von Daten macht es erforderlich, neue Fragen zu sozialverträglichen Datenmärkten aufzuwerfen. So gibt es sowohl eine Tendenz zur vereinfachten Datenteilung als auch die Forderung, die informationelle Selbstbestimmung besser zu schützen. Innerhalb dieses Spannungsfeldes bewegt sich die Idee von Datentreuhändern. Ziel des Beitrags ist darzulegen, dass zwischen verschiedenen Formen der Datentreuhänderschaft unterschieden werden sollte, um der Komplexität des Themas gerecht zu werden. Insbesondere bedarf es neben der mehrseitigen Treuhänderschaft, mit dem Treuhänder als neutraler Instanz, auch der einseitigen Treuhänderschaft, bei dem der Treuhänder als Anwalt der Verbraucherinteressen fungiert. Aus dieser Perspektive wird das Modell der Datentreuhänderschaft als stellvertretende Deutung der Interessen individueller und kollektiver Identitäten systematisch entwickelt.
Taste is a complex phenomenon that depends on the individual experience and is a matter of collective negotiation and mediation. On the contrary, it is uncommon to include taste and its many facets in everyday design, particularly online shopping for fresh food products. To realize this unused potential, we conducted two Co-Design workshops. Based on the participants’ results in the workshops, we prototyped and evaluated a click-dummy smart-phone app to explore consumers’ needs for digital taste depiction. We found that emphasizing the natural qualities of food products, external reviews, and personalizing features lead to a reflection on the individual taste experience. The self-reflection through our design enables consumers to develop their taste competencies and thus strengthen their autonomy in decision-making. Ultimately, exploring taste as a social experience adds to a broader understanding of taste beyond a sensory phenomenon.
Focus on what matters: improved feature selection techniques for personal thermal comfort modelling
(2022)
Occupants' personal thermal comfort (PTC) is indispensable for their well-being, physical and mental health, and work efficiency. Predicting PTC preferences in a smart home can be a prerequisite to adjusting the indoor temperature for providing a comfortable environment. In this research, we focus on identifying relevant features for predicting PTC preferences. We propose a machine learning-based predictive framework by employing supervised feature selection techniques. We apply two feature selection techniques to select the optimal sets of features to improve the thermal preference prediction performance. The experimental results on a public PTC dataset demonstrated the efficiency of the feature selection techniques that we have applied. In turn, our PTC prediction framework with feature selection techniques achieved state-of-the-art performance in terms of accuracy, Cohen's kappa, and area under the curve (AUC), outperforming conventional methods.
For most people, using their body to authenticate their identity is an integral part of daily life. From our fingerprints to our facial features, our physical characteristics store the information that identifies us as "us." This biometric information is becoming increasingly vital to the way we access and use technology. As more and more platform operators struggle with traffic from malicious bots on their servers, the burden of proof is on users, only this time they have to prove their very humanity and there is no court or jury to judge, but an invisible algorithmic system. In this paper, we critique the invisibilization of artificial intelligence policing. We argue that this practice obfuscates the underlying process of biometric verification. As a result, the new "invisible" tests leave no room for the user to question whether the process of questioning is even fair or ethical. We challenge this thesis by offering a juxtaposition with the science fiction imagining of the Turing test in Blade Runner to reevaluate the ethical grounds for reverse Turing tests, and we urge the research community to pursue alternative routes of bot identification that are more transparent and responsive.
AI (artificial intelligence) systems are increasingly being used in all aspects of our lives, from mundane routines to sensitive decision-making and even creative tasks. Therefore, an appropriate level of trust is required so that users know when to rely on the system and when to override it. While research has looked extensively at fostering trust in human-AI interactions, the lack of standardized procedures for human-AI trust makes it difficult to interpret results and compare across studies. As a result, the fundamental understanding of trust between humans and AI remains fragmented. This workshop invites researchers to revisit existing approaches and work toward a standardized framework for studying AI trust to answer the open questions: (1) What does trust mean between humans and AI in different contexts? (2) How can we create and convey the calibrated level of trust in interactions with AI? And (3) How can we develop a standardized framework to address new challenges?