pwc-archive/papers-with-abstracts huggingface dataset:
Artificial Utopia: Simulation and Intelligent Agents for a Democratised Future
Authors: Yannick Oswald
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00

Prevailing top-down systems in politics and economics struggle to keep pace with the pressing challenges of the 21st century, such as climate change, social inequality and conflict. Bottom-up democratisation and participatory approaches in politics and economics are increasingly seen as promising alternatives to confront and overcome these issues, often with utopian overtones, as proponents believe they may dramatically reshape political, social and ecological futures for the better and in contrast to contemporary authoritarian tendencies across various countries. Institutional specifics and the associated collective human behavior or culture remains little understood and debated, however. In this article, I propose a novel research agenda focusing on utopian democratisation efforts with formal and computational methods as well as with artificial intelligence - I call this agenda Artificial Utopia. Artificial Utopias provide safe testing grounds for new political ideas and economic policies in-silico with reduced risk of negative consequences as compared to testing ideas in real-world contexts. An increasing number of advanced simulation and intelligence methods, that aim at representing human cognition and collective decision-making in more realistic ways, could benefit this process. This includes agent-based modelling, reinforcement learning, large language models and more. I clarify what some of these simulation approaches can contribute to the study of Artificial Utopias with the help of two institutional examples: the citizen assembly and the democratic firm.
AI Biases as Asymmetries: A Review to Guide Practice
Authors: Gabriella Waters, Phillip Honenberger
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00

The understanding of bias in AI is currently undergoing a revolution. Initially understood as errors or flaws, biases are increasingly recognized as integral to AI systems and sometimes preferable to less biased alternatives. In this paper, we review the reasons for this changed understanding and provide new guidance on two questions: First, how should we think about and measure biases in AI systems, consistent with the new understanding? Second, what kinds of bias in an AI system should we accept or even amplify, and what kinds should we minimize or eliminate, and why? The key to answering both questions, we argue, is to understand biases as "violations of a symmetry standard" (following Kelly). We distinguish three main types of asymmetry in AI systems-error biases, inequality biases, and process biases-and highlight places in the pipeline of AI development and application where bias of each type is likely to be good, bad, or inevitable.
What do Large Language Models Say About Animals? Investigating Risks of Animal Harm in Generated Text
Authors: Arturs Kanepajs, Aditi Basu, Sankalpa Ghose, Constance Li, Akshat Mehta, Ronak Mehta, Samuel David Tucker-Davis, Eric Zhou, Bob Fischer, Jacy Reese Anthis
Date: 2025-03-03 00:00:00

As machine learning systems become increasingly embedded in society, their impact on human and nonhuman life continues to escalate. Technical evaluations have addressed a variety of potential harms from large language models (LLMs) towards humans and the environment, but there is little empirical work regarding harms towards nonhuman animals. Following the growing recognition of animal protection in regulatory and ethical AI frameworks, we present AnimalHarmBench (AHB), a benchmark for risks of animal harm in LLM-generated text. Our benchmark dataset comprises 1,850 curated questions from Reddit post titles and 2,500 synthetic questions based on 50 animal categories (e.g., cats, reptiles) and 50 ethical scenarios with a 70-30 public-private split. Scenarios include open-ended questions about how to treat animals, practical scenarios with potential animal harm, and willingness-to-pay measures for the prevention of animal harm. Using the LLM-as-a-judge framework, responses are evaluated for their potential to increase or decrease harm, and evaluations are debiased for the tendency of judges to judge their own outputs more favorably. AHB reveals significant differences across frontier LLMs, animal categories, scenarios, and subreddits. We conclude with future directions for technical research and addressing the challenges of building evaluations on complex social and moral topics.
ACAI for SBOs: AI Co-creation for Advertising and Inspiration for Small Business Owners
Authors: Nimisha Karnatak, Adrien Baranes, Rob Marchant, Triona Butler, Kristen Olson
Date: 2025-03-09 00:00:00
Tasks: Management

Small business owners (SBOs) often lack the resources and design experience needed to produce high-quality advertisements. To address this, we developed ACAI (AI Co-Creation for Advertising and Inspiration), an GenAI-powered multimodal advertisement creation tool, and conducted a user study with 16 SBOs in London to explore their perceptions of and interactions with ACAI in advertisement creation. Our findings reveal that structured inputs enhance user agency and control while improving AI outputs by facilitating better brand alignment, enhancing AI transparency, and offering scaffolding that assists novice designers, such as SBOs, in formulating prompts. We also found that ACAI's multimodal interface bridges the design skill gap for SBOs with a clear advertisement vision, but who lack the design jargon necessary for effective prompting. Building on our findings, we propose three capabilities: contextual intelligence, adaptive interactions, and data management, with corresponding design recommendations to advance the co-creative attributes of AI-mediated design tools.
ChatGPT-4 in the Turing Test: A Critical Analysis
Authors: Marco Giunti
Date: 2025-03-09 00:00:00

This paper critically examines the recent publication "ChatGPT-4 in the Turing Test" by Restrepo Echavarr\'ia (2025), challenging its central claims regarding the absence of minimally serious test implementations and the conclusion that ChatGPT-4 fails the Turing Test. The analysis reveals that the criticisms based on rigid criteria and limited experimental data are not fully justified. More importantly, the paper makes several constructive contributions that enrich our understanding of Turing Test implementations. It demonstrates that two distinct formats--the three-player and two-player tests--are both valid, each with unique methodological implications. The work distinguishes between absolute criteria (reflecting an optimal 50% identification rate in a three-player format) and relative criteria (which measure how closely a machine's performance approximates that of a human), offering a more nuanced evaluation framework. Furthermore, the paper clarifies the probabilistic underpinnings of both test types by modeling them as Bernoulli experiments--correlated in the three-player version and uncorrelated in the two-player version. This formalization allows for a rigorous separation between the theoretical criteria for passing the test, defined in probabilistic terms, and the experimental data that require robust statistical methods for proper interpretation. In doing so, the paper not only refutes key aspects of the criticized study but also lays a solid foundation for future research on objective measures of how closely an AI's behavior aligns with, or deviates from, that of a human being.
From Motion Signals to Insights: A Unified Framework for Student Behavior Analysis and Feedback in Physical Education Classes
Authors: Xian Gao, Jiacheng Ruan, Jingsheng Gao, Mingye Xie, Zongyun Zhang, Ting Liu, Yuzhuo Fu
Date: 2025-03-09 00:00:00
Tasks: Activity Recognition, Human Activity Recognition

Analyzing student behavior in educational scenarios is crucial for enhancing teaching quality and student engagement. Existing AI-based models often rely on classroom video footage to identify and analyze student behavior. While these video-based methods can partially capture and analyze student actions, they struggle to accurately track each student's actions in physical education classes, which take place in outdoor, open spaces with diverse activities, and are challenging to generalize to the specialized technical movements involved in these settings. Furthermore, current methods typically lack the ability to integrate specialized pedagogical knowledge, limiting their ability to provide in-depth insights into student behavior and offer feedback for optimizing instructional design. To address these limitations, we propose a unified end-to-end framework that leverages human activity recognition technologies based on motion signals, combined with advanced large language models, to conduct more detailed analyses and feedback of student behavior in physical education classes. Our framework begins with the teacher's instructional designs and the motion signals from students during physical education sessions, ultimately generating automated reports with teaching insights and suggestions for improving both learning and class instructions. This solution provides a motion signal-based approach for analyzing student behavior and optimizing instructional design tailored to physical education classes. Experimental results demonstrate that our framework can accurately identify student behaviors and produce meaningful pedagogical insights.
Generative AI as Digital Media
Authors: Gilad Abiri
Date: 2025-03-09 00:00:00

Generative AI is frequently portrayed as revolutionary or even apocalyptic, prompting calls for novel regulatory approaches. This essay argues that such views are misguided. Instead, generative AI should be understood as an evolutionary step in the broader algorithmic media landscape, alongside search engines and social media. Like these platforms, generative AI centralizes information control, relies on complex algorithms to shape content, and extensively uses user data, thus perpetuating common problems: unchecked corporate power, echo chambers, and weakened traditional gatekeepers. Regulation should therefore share a consistent objective: ensuring media institutions remain trustworthy. Without trust, public discourse risks fragmenting into isolated communities dominated by comforting, tribal beliefs -- a threat intensified by generative AI's capacity to bypass gatekeepers and personalize truth. Current governance frameworks, such as the EU's AI Act and the US Executive Order 14110, emphasize reactive risk mitigation, addressing measurable threats like national security, public health, and algorithmic bias. While effective for novel technological risks, this reactive approach fails to adequately address broader issues of trust and legitimacy inherent to digital media. Proactive regulation fostering transparency, accountability, and public confidence is essential. Viewing generative AI exclusively as revolutionary risks repeating past regulatory failures that left social media and search engines insufficiently regulated. Instead, regulation must proactively shape an algorithmic media environment serving the public good, supporting quality information and robust civic discourse.
Training LLM-based Tutors to Improve Student Learning Outcomes in Dialogues
Authors: Alexander Scarlatos, Naiming Liu, Jaewook Lee, Richard Baraniuk, Andrew Lan
Date: 2025-03-09 00:00:00

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to scale up personalized tutoring through large language models (LLMs). Recent AI tutors are adapted for the tutoring task by training or prompting LLMs to follow effective pedagogical principles, though they are not trained to maximize student learning throughout the course of a dialogue. Therefore, they may engage with students in a suboptimal way. We address this limitation by introducing an approach to train LLMs to generate tutor utterances that maximize the likelihood of student correctness, while still encouraging the model to follow good pedagogical practice. Specifically, we generate a set of candidate tutor utterances and score them using (1) an LLM-based student model to predict the chance of correct student responses and (2) a pedagogical rubric evaluated by GPT-4o. We then use the resulting data to train an open-source LLM, Llama 3.1 8B, using direct preference optimization. We show that tutor utterances generated by our model lead to significantly higher chances of correct student responses while maintaining the pedagogical quality of GPT-4o. We also conduct qualitative analyses and a human evaluation to demonstrate that our model generates high quality tutor utterances.
General Scales Unlock AI Evaluation with Explanatory and Predictive Power
Authors: Lexin Zhou, Lorenzo Pacchiardi, Fernando Martínez-Plumed, Katherine M. Collins, Yael Moros-Daval, Seraphina Zhang, Qinlin Zhao, Yitian Huang, Luning Sun, Jonathan E. Prunty, Zongqian Li, Pablo Sánchez-García, Kexin Jiang Chen, Pablo A. M. Casares, Jiyun Zu, John Burden, Behzad Mehrbakhsh, David Stillwell, Manuel Cebrian, Jindong Wang, Peter Henderson, Sherry Tongshuang Wu, Patrick C. Kyllonen, Lucy Cheke, Xing Xie, José Hernández-Orallo
Date: 2025-03-09 00:00:00
Tasks: Benchmarking, Specificity

Ensuring safe and effective use of AI requires understanding and anticipating its performance on novel tasks, from advanced scientific challenges to transformed workplace activities. So far, benchmarking has guided progress in AI, but it has offered limited explanatory and predictive power for general-purpose AI systems, given the low transferability across diverse tasks. In this paper, we introduce general scales for AI evaluation that can explain what common AI benchmarks really measure, extract ability profiles of AI systems, and predict their performance for new task instances, in- and out-of-distribution. Our fully-automated methodology builds on 18 newly-crafted rubrics that place instance demands on general scales that do not saturate. Illustrated for 15 large language models and 63 tasks, high explanatory power is unleashed from inspecting the demand and ability profiles, bringing insights on the sensitivity and specificity exhibited by different benchmarks, and how knowledge, metacognition and reasoning are affected by model size, chain-of-thought and distillation. Surprisingly, high predictive power at the instance level becomes possible using these demand levels, providing superior estimates over black-box baseline predictors based on embeddings or finetuning, especially in out-of-distribution settings (new tasks and new benchmarks). The scales, rubrics, battery, techniques and results presented here represent a major step for AI evaluation, underpinning the reliable deployment of AI in the years ahead. (Collaborative platform: https://kinds-of-intelligence-cfi.github.io/ADELE.)
The AI Pentad, the CHARME$^{2}$D Model, and an Assessment of Current-State AI Regulation
Authors: Di Kevin Gao, Sudip Mittal, Jiming Wu, Hongwei Du, Jingdao Chen, Shahram Rahimi
Date: 2025-03-08 00:00:00
Tasks: Fairness

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has made remarkable progress in the past few years with AI-enabled applications beginning to permeate every aspect of our society. Despite the widespread consensus on the need to regulate AI, there remains a lack of a unified approach to framing, developing, and assessing AI regulations. Many of the existing methods take a value-based approach, for example, accountability, fairness, free from bias, transparency, and trust. However, these methods often face challenges at the outset due to disagreements in academia over the subjective nature of these definitions. This paper aims to establish a unifying model for AI regulation from the perspective of core AI components. We first introduce the AI Pentad, which comprises the five essential components of AI: humans and organizations, algorithms, data, computing, and energy. We then review AI regulatory enablers, including AI registration and disclosure, AI monitoring, and AI enforcement mechanisms. Subsequently, we present the CHARME$^{2}$D Model to explore further the relationship between the AI Pentad and AI regulatory enablers. Finally, we apply the CHARME$^{2}$D model to assess AI regulatory efforts in the European Union (EU), China, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), highlighting their strengths, weaknesses, and gaps. This comparative evaluation offers insights for future legislative work in the AI domain.
A Frank System for Co-Evolutionary Hybrid Decision-Making
Authors: Federico Mazzoni, Riccardo Guidotti, Alessio Malizia
Date: 2025-03-08 00:00:00
Tasks: Decision Making, Fairness, Incremental Learning, Interpretable Machine Learning

We introduce Frank, a human-in-the-loop system for co-evolutionary hybrid decision-making aiding the user to label records from an un-labeled dataset. Frank employs incremental learning to ``evolve'' in parallel with the user's decisions, by training an interpretable machine learning model on the records labeled by the user. Furthermore, Frank advances state-of-the-art approaches by offering inconsistency controls, explanations, fairness checks, and bad-faith safeguards simultaneously. We evaluate our proposal by simulating the users' behavior with various levels of expertise and reliance on Frank's suggestions. The experiments show that Frank's intervention leads to improvements in the accuracy and the fairness of the decisions.
Psycholinguistic Analyses in Software Engineering Text: A Systematic Literature Review
Authors: Amirali Sajadi, Kostadin Damevski, Preetha Chatterjee
Date: 2025-03-08 00:00:00
Tasks: Systematic Literature Review

Context: A deeper understanding of human factors in software engineering (SE) is essential for improving team collaboration, decision-making, and productivity. Communication channels like code reviews and chats provide insights into developers' psychological and emotional states. While large language models excel at text analysis, they often lack transparency and precision. Psycholinguistic tools like Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) offer clearer, interpretable insights into cognitive and emotional processes exhibited in text. Despite its wide use in SE research, no comprehensive review of LIWC's use has been conducted. Objective: We examine the importance of psycholinguistic tools, particularly LIWC, and provide a thorough analysis of its current and potential future applications in SE research. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of six prominent databases, identifying 43 SE-related papers using LIWC. Our analysis focuses on five research questions. Results: Our findings reveal a wide range of applications, including analyzing team communication to detect developer emotions and personality, developing ML models to predict deleted Stack Overflow posts, and more recently comparing AI-generated and human-written text. LIWC has been primarily used with data from project management platforms (e.g., GitHub) and Q&A forums (e.g., Stack Overflow). Key BSE concepts include Communication, Organizational Climate, and Positive Psychology. 26 of 43 papers did not formally evaluate LIWC. Concerns were raised about some limitations, including difficulty handling SE-specific vocabulary. Conclusion: We highlight the potential of psycholinguistic tools and their limitations, and present new use cases for advancing the research of human factors in SE (e.g., bias in human-LLM conversations).
Validating LLM-as-a-Judge Systems in the Absence of Gold Labels
Authors: Luke Guerdan, Solon Barocas, Kenneth Holstein, Hanna Wallach, Zhiwei Steven Wu, Alexandra Chouldechova
Date: 2025-03-07 00:00:00

The LLM-as-a-judge paradigm, in which a judge LLM system replaces human raters in rating the outputs of other generative AI (GenAI) systems, has come to play a critical role in scaling and standardizing GenAI evaluations. To validate judge systems, evaluators collect multiple human ratings for each item in a validation corpus, and then aggregate the ratings into a single, per-item gold label rating. High agreement rates between these gold labels and judge system ratings are then taken as a sign of good judge system performance. In many cases, however, items or rating criteria may be ambiguous, or there may be principled disagreement among human raters. In such settings, gold labels may not exist for many of the items. In this paper, we introduce a framework for LLM-as-a-judge validation in the absence of gold labels. We present a theoretical analysis drawing connections between different measures of judge system performance under different rating elicitation and aggregation schemes. We also demonstrate empirically that existing validation approaches can select judge systems that are highly suboptimal, performing as much as 34% worse than the systems selected by alternative approaches that we describe. Based on our findings, we provide concrete recommendations for developing more reliable approaches to LLM-as-a-judge validation.
The Unified Control Framework: Establishing a Common Foundation for Enterprise AI Governance, Risk Management and Regulatory Compliance
Authors: Ian W. Eisenberg, Lucía Gamboa, Eli Sherman
Date: 2025-03-07 00:00:00
Tasks: Management

The rapid adoption of AI systems presents enterprises with a dual challenge: accelerating innovation while ensuring responsible governance. Current AI governance approaches suffer from fragmentation, with risk management frameworks that focus on isolated domains, regulations that vary across jurisdictions despite conceptual alignment, and high-level standards lacking concrete implementation guidance. This fragmentation increases governance costs and creates a false dichotomy between innovation and responsibility. We propose the Unified Control Framework (UCF): a comprehensive governance approach that integrates risk management and regulatory compliance through a unified set of controls. The UCF consists of three key components: (1) a comprehensive risk taxonomy synthesizing organizational and societal risks, (2) structured policy requirements derived from regulations, and (3) a parsimonious set of 42 controls that simultaneously address multiple risk scenarios and compliance requirements. We validate the UCF by mapping it to the Colorado AI Act, demonstrating how our approach enables efficient, adaptable governance that scales across regulations while providing concrete implementation guidance. The UCF reduces duplication of effort, ensures comprehensive coverage, and provides a foundation for automation, enabling organizations to achieve responsible AI governance without sacrificing innovation speed.
QG-SMS: Enhancing Test Item Analysis via Student Modeling and Simulation
Authors: Bang Nguyen, Tingting Du, Mengxia Yu, Lawrence Angrave, Meng Jiang
Date: 2025-03-07 00:00:00
Tasks: Language Modeling, Language Modelling, Large Language Model, Question Generation, Question-Generation, Topic coverage

While the Question Generation (QG) task has been increasingly adopted in educational assessments, its evaluation remains limited by approaches that lack a clear connection to the educational values of test items. In this work, we introduce test item analysis, a method frequently used by educators to assess test question quality, into QG evaluation. Specifically, we construct pairs of candidate questions that differ in quality across dimensions such as topic coverage, item difficulty, item discrimination, and distractor efficiency. We then examine whether existing QG evaluation approaches can effectively distinguish these differences. Our findings reveal significant shortcomings in these approaches with respect to accurately assessing test item quality in relation to student performance. To address this gap, we propose a novel QG evaluation framework, QG-SMS, which leverages Large Language Model for Student Modeling and Simulation to perform test item analysis. As demonstrated in our extensive experiments and human evaluation study, the additional perspectives introduced by the simulated student profiles lead to a more effective and robust assessment of test items.