Papers is Alpha. This content is part of an effort to make research more accessible, and (most likely) has lost some details from the original. You can find the original paper here.
Introduction and background
Recent developments in generative AI , i.e., AI technologies that automatically generate visual or written content based on text prompts, have led to much speculation and concernabout what these developments may mean for different professions in the future, particularly for professionals where creativity accounts for a sizable part of their everyday work. Potential “threats” that generative AI models may pose for creative professionals (“creatives”) include the ability to automate generation of high(er) quality content (text, code, images, and video), increased content variety, and personalized content based on preferences of individual users and consumers. Some current discourse about generative AI models frame them as threatening the ownership and agency of creatives. See, e.g.,for interviews with artists whose work was — unbeknownst to them — used to train AI models that generated images in the style of the artists’ work. Rogers critically discusses this scenario in terms of `the attribution problem with generative AI'.
Conversely, other creatives express curiosity and excitement about the potential this technology may offer, e.g.,. Regardless of whether generative AI is seen as a blessing or curse, it is both timely and of research value to answer questions about how it and creatives can most fruitfully coexist.
One response to perceived threats posed by AI is the notion of participatory AI , where the goal is to include `wider publics’ in the development and deployment of AI systems. Historically, the emergence of participatory design (PD) in the 1970s was motivated by efforts to rebalance _“power and agency in the professional realm”_in order to empower workers to “codetermine the development of the information system and of their workplace”. In light of this historical backdrop, participatory AI is expected to empower those affected by the development of novel technologies by enforcing values of inclusion, plurality, collective safety, and ownership.
-1 One step in the direction of participatory AI is to understand the needs of people and communities affected. Related research in this direction includes Singh et al., who explored which assumptions and expectations creative writers have for a supporting AI tool; Guzdial et al., who explored designers’ expectations for AI-driven game-level editors; and Zhu et al., who argued for a better understanding of game designers’ needs when co-creating with AI.
Our paper contributes to this objective by surfacing and categorizing concerns and expectations that creatives of different types currently have about the effect of generative AI on their work.
It represents the authors'
first empirical research into the question of How might we design and perform participatory AI?
This question is particularly relevant to those who design and develop AIs for creatives and those who design and develop creativity support tools that use AI technology.
-1 Our findings, albeit preliminary, identify important topics that may inform participatory design of generative AI so creatives can “influence digital technologies that will change their work practices or everyday life”, the goal of participatory design in its essence. Our contributions include the following. (1) We introduce new conceptions about what constitutes creativity in relation to generative AI. (2) We categorize some reasons why creatives are and are not concerned about novel generative AI. (3) We categorize reasons why some creatives are curious and excited about AI and how it might augment their creative processes. (4) We discuss possible foci for the design of participatory AI aimed at helping creative professionals Understand AI, Cope with AI, Adapt to AI, and Exploit AI.
Methods
We conducted a qualitative survey with open-ended questions designed to encourage longer answers and reflection. The survey format let respondents participate asynchronously, while allowing us to discover themes and directions for further in-depth research.
The survey was circulated to the authors’ networks of creative professionals as well as on social media. The call was posted as an open question of Are you a creative professional/professional creative, and do you have opinions about generative AI that you would like to share with us?' The term creative’ was left to self-definition, and we asked the respondents to explain the role of creativity in their profession. We collected responses over a period of approximately two months in late 2022. We offered a draw of five $25 gift cards to Amazon as symbolic compensation for participation. The study and survey were approved by the ethical committees of the authors’ universities.
Participants
We received 23 responses to the survey from creatives residing in Denmark (10), Germany (4), the United Kingdom (4), USA (3),Turkey (1), and Morocco (1). Respondents were between 21 and 55 years old, distributed as 21-25 (4), 26-30 (1), 31-35 (8), 36-40 (3), 41-45 (6), and 51-55 (1). 10 respondents identified as female, 12 as male, and 1 as non-binary. The respondents worked in a variety of fields, from computer science research to design of UX/UI and games to teaching. Most respondents came from software-oriented creative domains, and our findings should be read with this limitation in mind (see Section conclusion for a discussion of this limitation). We were more interested in people self-qualifying as a “creative professional” where creativity plays a significant role in their work, than we were in specific job titles. The responses, as well as a detailed overview of respondents, are presented in the supplementary material.
Survey and analysis
The survey consisted of both demographic questions and six questions related to our research interest (which we list below). We designed the questions to elicit respondents’ general understanding of and attitudes towards AI and creativity. We sought to prompt a deeper level of reflection and tried to avoid overloading respondents with questions.
In your own words, how would you define what AI (Artificial Intelligence) is?
Do you believe computers can be creative? Why/why not?
A standard definition of a creative idea is that it is: 1. original (new, either to the creator or to human history in general), 2. useful (in some context), and 3. surprising (it seems unlikely but possible). Given this definition, do you believe a computer/an AI algorithm can generate creative ideas? Why/why not?[This definition is a compilation of three-criterion definitions by, e.g., Bodenand Simonton.]
Are you excited about AI contributing to creative work in your profession? Why/why not?
Do you worry about AI replacing creative work in your profession? Why/why not?
Which role do you think AI will play in your profession in the near and far future?
Questions (4) and (5) were swapped for approximately half the respondents (in two different instances of the survey) to avoid priming respondents in any specific direction.
We performed a thematic analysis as described by Braun and Clarkeon the responses. We tagged responses individually with different codes and then clustered them into sub-themes, which we highlight in bold throughout Section 3.
Survey responses
How intelligent or creative is generative AI?
In order to inform the design of participatory AI, it is relevant to understand how creatives currently conceive of AI and its limits. These factors can inform decisions about how to design participation processes to, for instance, include more or less information and discussion about the state of AI.
What is AI?
Answers to the question “In your own words, how would you define AI?” varied, especially on two scales: technical depth (from superficial to deep understanding) and agency of AI (from no agency to high agency). In terms of technical depth , some respondents, naturally, had a deeper understanding of AI algorithms than others, e.g., from “… digital solutions that are trained to be helpful in specific ways” (P21) (technically superficial) to “A system capable of making dynamic choices based on input, dynamic as in non-binary evaluation of input referencing data model, a model which would ideally evolve through feedback of external verification of multiple processes’ (P2) (technically advanced).
We also saw interesting variation in the level of agency ascribed to the AI system, from no agency at all: “AI is a set of rules, defined by humans, which a computer can follow.” (P3) to a high degree of agency: “it’s a computer that over time improves itself in the tasks it has to solve by collecting information and inputs from humans” (P7). These understandings may influence creatives’ judgments of the degree to which AI can support them and contribute to/replace tasks in their creative processes.
We tagged 7 responses as portraying a relatively deep technical understanding with no agency to the computer. Six responses were tagged with a more superficial technical understanding and no agency ascribed to the computer. 10 responses were tagged as superficial technical understanding with a high degree of computational agency, and no responses were tagged as deep technical understanding and high agency of the computer. An overview is shown in the supplementary material, Figure fig-whatisai.
New definitions of creativity
The presence of generative AI encourages us to reevaluate and question our understanding of creativity and creative ideas. Most respondents who denied that AIs can be considered creative disputed the computer’s capacity to generate original output since it is trained only on already existing (human) input. However, one respondent wrote in answer to “Do you believe computers can be creative?”: “I kind of resent it - but yeah. If creativity is defined as something useful and new, then yeah I think so. Even though AI’s [sic] rely on training data and existing man-made patterns (which some might use to criticize AI’s as being derivative or as simply reproducing what already exists) the process of combining stuff into a new “something” isn’t really THAT different from what humans do… it’s just bigger in scale and I guess you might argue that humans are also just “trained on” a bunch of data… we also carry around a repertoire of input we can draw on to come up with ideas […] ideas are always rooted in some pre-existing thing(s)” (P5). Another participant noted that “What is my brain if not a computer that takes in all this provided data and produces its own result from a mix of the inputs? If that result is `creative’, then why is an AI not?” (P20).
This understanding is consistent with a traditional definition of creative ideas as being**novel', useful’, and `surprising’** , e.g.,. However, one respondent noted that “Computers aren’t creative by themselves as they only follow the orders that someone gives them” (P6). In P6’s understanding, creativity entails agency or initiative , which is not historically a property of the three-criterion definition of creativity.
Intention and sentience were described as criteria for creativity by some respondents: “There is not intention” (P1), “Creativity stems from personal experiences/knowledge/emotions and the need to express/communicate/use this […] Creativity lies not in the creation, but in why we create. Programs can emulate this, but without true sentience, it will always be [an] emulation” (P10), and “The computer still isn’t creative, it’s still just doing what it’s told […] Maybe I think it needs feelings to be truly creative?” (P23).
Other conditions for creativity were also evoked in the answers, such as (self-)awareness : “I think that true creativity requires a sense of self and self-awareness” (P8). “They are not creative in themselves; they are producing content unaware of the value they just created” (P21). Even experiences and inspiration were evoked: “Computers can solve problems and create art and everything, but it will all be logic and calculated and not because it got a sudden burst of inspiration or remembered something that happened in the second grade” (P23).
-1 Even if we do not assume that these definitions should be unanimously integrated into a scholarly or theoretical definition of creativity, it is interesting that reflecting on creativity in relation to the role of generative AI raises different conceptions of what creativity entails.
I Am Not Worried (Yet)
Only three of our 23 respondents unambiguously answered yes to being worried about AI replacing their work: “Yes, the market needs to adjust heavily and I don’t think the revolution will be entirely peaceful” (P2); “the idea of AI is mostly uncanny right now.” (P4), and “Yes I [worry]. (…) a lot of tasks such as writing micro copy for websites etc which UX writers currently do would be automated” (P14). Three more noted that they worry to some degree, or that they worry but are optimistic, e.g.: “I worry about it, but I hope the reality will be that AI becomes another tool” (P5).
Nine respondents noted that they did not worry at all, while six reported that they do not worry yet , e.g“for now only the boring parts would be replaced. But this take-my-job-away argument was made countless times in history, there will always be something new. We can’t be held back by this fear”_ (P12). We group reasons for concern (aside from losing work) into the following themes.
1. Worse quality output. P8 observed: “It concerns me already that video games are becoming something of an echo chamber, and the sheer volume of games being released are diluting the market and making it harder for indie games to get the recognition they need to do well.” The concern expressed here is not only that humans may become obsolete in the development process, but that the volume of output (in this case, of games) that AI (co-)creation makes possible will increase quantity but reduce quality of video games.
P9 wrote “I certainly don’t intend to replace all my hires with AI but some people will. They may achieve early success and they may also bring the genre into disrepute if they pump out a lot of lazy AI-written content.” This indicates worries that extend beyond individuals and their job security to concerns about an entire genre of creative content. This perspective assumes that AI produces creative output of worse quality than humans produce, which we could consider a reason not to worry about AI-generated content. However, in this case, the potential of such content to dilute' or bring into disrepute’ a whole genre or field presents a threat or concern to some creatives.
2. Weakening the creative process. Most respondents pointed out that humans will still be required in AI-facilitated creative processes or that the computer will simply help automate the `boring tasks.’ However, a few also reflected on what that might mean to the creative processes, e.g., “I also don’t like the way AI image generators get you results instantly. They skip the creative process and just take you straight to the result… […] that just overlooks a super important part of a creative process, which is exploration. And emergence, where stuff just kind of comes out of the process but you never imagined it would. Or happy accidents! In that sense I think AIs could actually lead to a stagnation in the history of creativity, if AI turns out to weaken the “creative muscle”’ (P5).
P11 further noted that “the meaning of creative' seems to be increasingly twisted to mean merely original/surprising,’ and partly because there is a tendency for many to be unaware of the amount of creativity that my work involves. […] A lot is being lost.” This observation raises seminal questions similar to those raised in other fields where complex human thought processes have historically been replaced or at least disrupted, such as the introduction of calculators in algebra: How does it affect human cognition if computational processes take over (part of) our thinking? Will we lose our ability to use those parts of our brain, or will it simply free up cognitive reserve to consider new and more significant issues?
3. Copyright issues. Generative AI works only because a dataset exists that it can be trained on, and this raises new copyright issues, as P16 notes, “the ethical implications of AI stealing other people’s work without credit […] make me a bit wary.” Many established artists have raised concerns about this issue since those whose art is currently visible on the internet lack means to opt out of image training databasesor otherwise control how their art is used. Interestingly, this concern wasmentioned directly by only one respondent, suggesting that either it is not a matter that appears to be a threat to creatives we surveyed or that they expect that a technological solution will emerge to address it; indeed, measures to protect intellectual properties of images, such as watermarks , are currently being developed.
Reasons for not worrying about generative AI having a deleterious effect on their professions were described in three themes:
1. AI cannot produce output without human input. As described in Section creativitydefinitions, several respondents questioned a computer’s ability to produce truly original output. This was also described as a reason not to worry about AI replacing creative production or problem solving since human input is needed for datasets to be trained on and verified: “Being able to generate a Rothko at the click of a button is only possible because Rothko himself had original thoughts - that isn’t creativity” (P8), and “human input is still needed to verify and maintain AI’s work” (P22).
2. AI output is not convincing . Several respondents also noted that they do not find AI-generated output completely convincing' or original: _“I don't see any authentic or convincing AI in artistic fields at all”_ (P8); _“I know it can create pretty, but I don't think it can create “Wow! I have never seen anything like it!””_ (P23); and _“at the moment it's a tool that when used skillfully can create awesome images, but there still needs to be someone with creative taste and an eye for imagery at the helm. AIs also tend to generate samey’ images to me”_ (P20). Although this theme resembles the preceding one (AI needs human input to produce output), which pertains more to requiring a human in the process of creating and maintaining generative AIs, whereas the current theme critiques generative AIs’ output .
3. My work/creative process is too complex for AI to imitate. Finally, several respondents observed that their work process is too complex for AI to replace it: “No, the complexity and dependencies is [sic] too high in my work” (P21); “[I do not worry] for user interface design, there’s so much to consider and think through that I can’t see an AI making something fluid yet” (P16). Particularly in processes of original problem solving and client communication, human cognition was described as indispensable: “Even the new code that they write is still going to be unoriginal in terms of problem solving” (P15); “We work very closely with clients and our work requires a lot of thought process behind it. Our main product is communication ideas and solving problems visually. Often we can do that better with a scribble than a fancy looking piece of art. You can never ask the AI about the intention/thoughts/feelings behind the product” (P10).
Exciting Times Ahead!
Thirteen respondents noted that they are more or less unequivocally excited about AI contributing to creative work in their profession (such as “Yes!” or “Absolutely, exciting times ahead!” (P12)). Four volunteered some version of “yes and no,” e.g., “To some extent. I think some people will be able to use it in a nice way” (P7). We grouped specific reasons for being excited about the advent and adoption of generative AI technology in creative professions into three themes:
1. AI can raise productivity for the individual or for larger processes. Several respondents imagined AI being used to raise productivity, either in terms of individual efficiency (e.g., eliminating repetitive tasks and thus allowing creatives to focus on `more important’ work): “there are things that are more efficient to leave to machines which should pair with things that humans will be better at for the foreseeable future.” (P19)) or in terms of cultivating higher output rates by streamlining processes: “it would streamline many of the standard questions in the field” (P1).
2. AI can offer inspiration. In fields that require creativity, it is perhaps not surprising that respondents highlighted using quickly generated output as a source of inspiration in their creative process. Creative professionals often rely on readily available examples of design for inspiration, and the availability of AI to generate innumerable novel examples was seen as a powerful opportunity for `opening up new solution spaces,’ e.g.: “It will allow me to iterate through a much bigger possibility space” (P12); and “it will make some work a lot easier/more efficient as you can try out different ideas in a very short amount of time” (P6). In this role, AI is imagined to augment what we call the divergent parts of the creative process by offering examples and opening up novel and larger solution spaces.
3. AI can lead to higher quality output. Finally, some respondents highlighted the opportunity for AI to yield higher quality output, partially for the two reasons above (offering novel inspiration and freeing up time to work on tasks more central to the creative core), and partially due to qualities inherent in the AI itself: “Any creative work is better as a team effort and differences are a driving force. AI is very different and I want to work with them” (P2); “it’s a powerful tool that can enhance my work. […] I can see it slotting into a step between browsing Pinterest for reference art and sketching my own stuff” (P20). Two respondents also mentioned using AI for convergent parts of the creative process, for instance, decision making and evaluation: “It can augment decision making” (P14); and “it opens up to possibilities to create new solutions and evaluate in new ways” (P21), although specific ways for evaluation to occur were not described further.
Discussion: Opportunities for participation
Although complex, it seems prudent and timely to tackle the issue of how to encourage populations to participate in the development of AI more broadly. We consolidate our preliminary analysis into four categories of potential focus for the design of participatory AI for creatives: (1) Understanding AI , (2) Coping with AI , (3) Adapting to AI , and (4) Exploiting AI . These categories align with the participatory design approach presented by Sandersby considering what end-users know (= understand AI), feel (= coping with AI), do (= adapt to AI), and dream (= exploit AI). The categories offer a framework for engaging professional creatives in participatory AI design in a meaningful way. One could ask questions that align with the framework, e.g., “How might we help future users understand this technology” or “How might we help future users adapt to new work flows?”
Understanding AI
Some survey responses identify a superficial understanding of the technical side of AI. This is acceptable, just as it is not a requirement of driving a car that one understands how the engine works. However, creatives will be better prepared to use AI as creativity support tools and design materials if they have a working understanding of the tools and their limitations, particularly the level of agency that computers can be ascribed (as we saw, no responses that demonstrated a deep level of technical understanding also portrayed the computer as having a high degree of agency).
We suggest that facilitating a truthful understanding of AI is the first step in empowering these users to co-create with AI technology. It is easy to brush this responsibility off as a creatives-only undertaking. However, we believe that AI developers share an ethical responsibility to make their systems accessible and explainable to a broader public, in line with the HCI research agenda for explainable, accountable and intelligible systems.
Coping with AI
In the longer term, it is inevitable that AI-generated content of many kinds will be ubiquitous in most of our lives. How should we cope? We posit that creatives should hone their skills in creating and in evaluating creativity. The responses to our survey suggest that they can recognize and celebrate indispensable human properties of creativity and art, e.g.: “human[-like] creativity is due to a combination of experiences and impressions that are connected in ways that are largely defined by human culture, and also feelings/sensations […] that are mostly haphazard, and which AI don’t have” (P11). Sharing worries, excitement, and coping strategies — including avoiding AI, see, e.g,— as well as celebrating what is uniquely creative about human approaches seems an important and achievable goal of designing participatory AI. We imagine a future where generative AI openly celebrates the sources from which its data are harvested, and where creators of generative AI include input from end-users in their design processes.
Adapting to AI
When photography was invented, artists adjusted their activities to focus less on realism and more on interpretation, whether through impressionism, abstraction, or surrealism (see, e.g.,for a more elaborate discussion of this). As writing, translation, paraphrasing and poetry become increasingly automated, professional writers and editors may become “bosses to bots,” instructing them on what to write, how to tailor material, and what to re-write when results do not meet professional or personal standards.
Where by coping we mean respectfully considering the new reality that these technologies bring about, by adapting we suggest more comprehensive inclusion of creatives in the development of specific generative AI models. Several respondents shared excitement about the possibilities of using AI to help automate bureaucracy, repetitive tasks, and boring work. The responsibility of facilitating adaptation, however, does not fall only on creatives. By understanding creative needs and processes, generative AI developers may tailor AI systems to help specific professions and crafts in a way that is not only meaningful for creatives, but that may enhance the development of AI itself, similar to how PD was originally meant not only to improve information systems but also toempower workers.
Exploiting AI
Photography changed what painters did, but it also opened up a field and a new profession: photographer. Technologies such as ChatGPT will change what writers do. Journalists are likely to spend more of their efforts on investigation and acquiring stories and less time on wordsmithing the reports on those stories. A mystery writer may give increased attention to plot features and less to the word-by-word narrative. Completely new tools and media may come out of the new AI technologies, including new types of creative jobs; as P3 notes, “the far future might include both 2D and 3D assets, generated in real time, as the player interacts with the experience […] Experiences still need to be controlled, to ensure a good user experience. Therefore it would probably increase the number of creative/technical positions within game companies.” (P3).
We hypothesize that such technology can reach its full potential only if creative professionals truly participate in its development. AI has sometimes been described as “a new shiny hammer in search of nails”, i.e., the technology or tool is being developed ahead of its specific purpose. We posit that if generative AI is developed with participation from creatives, there is a chance not only of better integration of AI in specific creative work practices, but also of leveraging creative competencies to imagine completely new avenues for these technologies.
Conclusion and future work
The insights presented in this abstract illustrate some of the ways in which creative professionals speculate about and anticipate how AI may impact their creative work practices. Based on the insights, we encourage engaging creatives in the development of generative AI, both in developing concrete technology and in managing larger project issues as representatives of their peers, in line with the ideals of participatory design. Pathways for developing more participatory AI should consider how creatives may better understand , cope with , adapt to as well as exploit AI .
-1 While the scope of our study is limited, we believe that both technology development and opinions towards AI are changing so quickly that it is relevant to share thesepreliminary results. We hope they will spark discussions and inform future research into how to develop and use AI in a way that encourages and requires participation of the people who will be affected most by these technologies in the future. Since most creative fields represented in our study are software-oriented, it is possible that the expressed views are more open and welcoming towards AI. Future research should include a more evenly distributed representation from different creative fields as well as obtain richer data by conducting interview studies.
-1 Furthermore, the respondents came from different creative industries, and their everyday work lives may therefore not necessarily be impacted in the same ways by generative AI. We have also not characterized how each individual’s understanding of AI relates to, for instance, their level of worry or expectations since we believe this would require a larger participant group and deeper investigation.
Future work could categorize different creative industries and identify which and how specific work tasks within these industries may be impacted by generative AI, as well as investigate different ways to support these creative practices with AI.
This research has been supported by the VILLUM Foundation, grant 37176 (ATTiKA: Adaptive Tools for Technical Knowledge Acquisition) and by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P34226-N].
Respondents overview
Graph of responses to “What is AI?”
Bibliography
1@inproceedings{abdul2018trends,
2 publisher = {ACM New York, NY},
3 address = {New York, NY},
4 year = {2018},
5 pages = {1--18},
6 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems},
7 author = {Abdul, Ashraf and Vermeulen, Jo and Wang, Danding and Lim, Brian Y and Kankanhalli, Mohan},
8 title = {Trends and trajectories for explainable, accountable and intelligible systems: An hci research agenda},
9}
10
11@misc{thecollectorPhotographyPioneered,
12 note = {[Accessed 18-Jan-2023]},
13 year = {2022},
14 howpublished = {\url{https://www.thecollector.com/how-photography-transformed-art/}},
15 title = {{H}ow {P}hotography {P}ioneered a {N}ew {U}nderstanding of {A}rt --- thecollector.com},
16 author = {Silva, Eva},
17}
18
19@inproceedings{zhu2018explainable,
20 publisher = {IEEE},
21 year = {2018},
22 pages = {1--8},
23 booktitle = {2018 IEEE conference on computational intelligence and games (CIG)},
24 author = {Zhu, Jichen and Liapis, Antonios and Risi, Sebastian and Bidarra, Rafael and Youngblood, G Michael},
25 title = {Explainable AI for designers: A human-centered perspective on mixed-initiative co-creation},
26}
27
28@misc{kotakuArtistsProtest,
29 note = {[Accessed 01-Mar-2023]},
30 year = {2022},
31 howpublished = {\url{https://kotaku.com/artstation-ai-art-generated-images-epic-games-protest-1849891085}},
32 title = {{A}rtists {P}rotest {A}fter {A}rt{S}tation {F}eatures {A}{I}-{G}enerated {I}mages [{U}pdate] --- kotaku.com},
33 author = {Plunkett, Luke},
34}
35
36@article{mollick2022new,
37 year = {2022},
38 journal = {Available at SSRN},
39 author = {Mollick, Ethan R and Mollick, Lilach},
40 title = {New Modes of Learning Enabled by AI Chatbots: Three Methods and Assignments},
41}
42
43@misc{waxyInvasiveDiffusion,
44 note = {[Accessed 18-Jan-2023]},
45 year = {2022},
46 howpublished = {\url{https://waxy.org/2022/11/invasive-diffusion-how-one-unwilling-illustrator-found-herself-turned-into-an-ai-model/}},
47 title = {{I}nvasive {D}iffusion: {H}ow one unwilling illustrator found herself turned into an {A}{I} model - {W}axy.org --- waxy.org},
48 author = {Andy Baio},
49}
50
51@misc{creatoreconomyWillHelp,
52 note = {[Accessed 18-Jan-2023]},
53 year = {2022},
54 howpublished = {\url{https://creatoreconomy.so/p/will-ai-art-help-or-hurt-artists}},
55 title = {{W}ill {A}{I} {A}rt {H}elp or {H}urt {A}rtists? --- creatoreconomy.so},
56 author = {Peter Yang},
57}
58
59@article{falk2022materializing,
60 abstract = {In this article, we argue that game jam formats are uniquely suited to engage participants in learning about artificial intelligence (AI) as a design material because of four factors which are characteristic of game jams: 1) Game jams provide an opportunity for hands-on, interactive prototyping, 2) Game jams encourage playful participation, 3) Game jams encourage creative combinations of AI and game development, and 4) Game jams offer understandable goals and evaluation metrics for AI. We support the argument with an interview study conducted with three AI experts who had all organized game jams with a focus on using AI in game development. Based on a thematic analysis of the expert interviews and a theoretical background of Schön's work on educating the reflective practitioner, we identified the four abovementioned factors as well as four recommendations for structuring and planning an AI-focused game jam: 1) Aligning repertoires, 2) Supporting playful participation, 3) Supporting ideation, and 4) Facilitating evaluation and reflection. Our contribution is motivated by the recent discourse on general challenges and recommendations of teaching AI identified by related literature, here under the long and intertwined history of games and AI in general. The article presents an initial discussion of the value of game jam formats for learning about AI and which factors need to be considered in regard to this specific learning goal.},
61 issn = {2624-9898},
62 doi = {10.3389/fcomp.2022.959351},
63 url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomp.2022.959351},
64 year = {2022},
65 volume = {4},
66 journal = {Frontiers in Computer Science},
67 title = {Materializing the abstract: Understanding AI by game jamming},
68 author = {Falk, Jeanette and Inie, Nanna},
69}
70
71@inproceedings{guzdial2019friend,
72 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
73 year = {2019},
74 pages = {1--13},
75 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems},
76 author = {Guzdial, Matthew and Liao, Nicholas and Chen, Jonathan and Chen, Shao-Yu and Shah, Shukan and Shah, Vishwa and Reno, Joshua and Smith, Gillian and Riedl, Mark O},
77 title = {Friend, collaborator, student, manager: How design of an ai-driven game level editor affects creators},
78}
79
80@article{singh2022hide,
81 publisher = {ACM New York, NY},
82 year = {2022},
83 journal = {ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction},
84 author = {Singh, Nikhil and Bernal, Guillermo and Savchenko, Daria and Glassman, Elena L},
85 title = {Where to hide a stolen elephant: Leaps in creative writing with multimodal machine intelligence},
86}
87
88@book{braun2012thematic,
89 publisher = {American Psychological Association},
90 year = {2012},
91 author = {Braun, Virginia and Clarke, Victoria},
92 title = {Thematic analysis.},
93}
94
95@article{bannon2018reimagining,
96 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
97 year = {2018},
98 pages = {26--32},
99 number = {1},
100 volume = {26},
101 journal = {Interactions},
102 author = {Bannon, Liam and Bardzell, Jeffrey and B{\o}dker, Susanne},
103 title = {Reimagining participatory design},
104}
105
106@misc{stablediffusionlitigationStableDiffusion,
107 note = {[Accessed 17-Jan-2023]},
108 year = {2023},
109 howpublished = {\url{https://stablediffusionlitigation.com/}},
110 title = {{S}table {D}iffusion litigation},
111 author = {{J}oseph {S}averi {L}aw {F}irm \& {M}atthew {B}utterick},
112}
113
114@misc{Rogers_2022_attribution,
115 year = { 2022 },
116 month = { Nov },
117 day = { 01 },
118 author = {Rogers, Anna},
119 url = { https://hackingsemantics.xyz/2022/attribution/ },
120 journal = {Hacking Semantics},
121 title = { The attribution problem with generative AI},
122}
123
124@misc{cnnTheseArtists,
125 note = {[Accessed 16-Jan-2023]},
126 year = {2022},
127 howpublished = {\url{https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/21/tech/artists-ai-images/index.html}},
128 title = {{T}hese artists found out their work was used to train {A}{I}. {N}ow they're furious | {C}{N}{N} {B}usiness --- edition.cnn.com},
129 author = {Rachel Metz},
130}
131
132@article{Abril07,
133 note = {},
134 url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1219092.1219093},
135 doi = {10.1145/1188913.1188915},
136 pages = {36--44},
137 year = {2007},
138 month = {January},
139 number = {1},
140 volume = {50},
141 journal = {Communications of the ACM},
142 title = {The patent holder's dilemma: Buy, sell, or troll?},
143 author = {Patricia S. Abril and Robert Plant},
144}
145
146@article{Cohen07,
147 acmid = {1219093},
148 url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1219092.1219093},
149 doi = {10.1145/1219092.1219093},
150 year = {2007},
151 month = {April},
152 number = {2},
153 volume = {54},
154 numpages = {50},
155 articleno = {5},
156 journal = {J. ACM},
157 title = {Deciding equivalances among conjunctive aggregate queries},
158 author = {Sarah Cohen and Werner Nutt and Yehoshua Sagic},
159}
160
161@book{Kosiur01,
162 note = {},
163 month = {},
164 series = {},
165 number = {},
166 volume = {},
167 editor = {},
168 edition = {2nd.},
169 address = {New York, NY},
170 year = {2001},
171 publisher = {Wiley},
172 title = {Understanding Policy-Based Networking},
173 author = {David Kosiur},
174}
175
176@book{Harel79,
177 note = {},
178 month = {},
179 number = {},
180 editor = {},
181 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09237-4},
182 doi = {10.1007/3-540-09237-4},
183 publisher = {Springer-Verlag},
184 address = {New York, NY},
185 volume = {68},
186 series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
187 title = {First-Order Dynamic Logic},
188 year = {1979},
189 author = {David Harel},
190}
191
192@inbook{Editor00,
193 note = {},
194 month = {},
195 type = {},
196 number = {},
197 pages = {},
198 chapter = {},
199 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09456-9},
200 doi = {10.1007/3-540-09237-4},
201 publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
202 edition = {1st.},
203 address = {Chicago},
204 volume = {9},
205 year = {2007},
206 series = {The name of the series one},
207 subtitle = {The book subtitle},
208 title = {The title of book one},
209 editor = {Ian Editor},
210 author = {},
211}
212
213@inbook{Editor00a,
214 note = {},
215 month = {},
216 type = {},
217 number = {},
218 pages = {},
219 chapter = {100},
220 volume = {},
221 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09456-9},
222 doi = {10.1007/3-540-09237-4},
223 publisher = {University of Chicago Press},
224 edition = {2nd.},
225 address = {Chicago},
226 year = {2008},
227 series = {The name of the series two},
228 subtitle = {The book subtitle},
229 title = {The title of book two},
230 editor = {Ian Editor},
231 author = {},
232}
233
234@incollection{Spector90,
235 note = {},
236 month = {},
237 type = {},
238 series = {},
239 number = {},
240 volume = {},
241 url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/90417.90738},
242 doi = {10.1145/90417.90738},
243 pages = {19--33},
244 editor = {Sape Mullender},
245 chapter = {},
246 edition = {2nd.},
247 year = {1990},
248 address = {New York, NY},
249 publisher = {ACM Press},
250 booktitle = {Distributed Systems},
251 title = {Achieving application requirements},
252 author = {Asad Z. Spector},
253}
254
255@incollection{Douglass98,
256 note = {},
257 month = {},
258 type = {},
259 number = {},
260 edition = {},
261 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-65193-4_29},
262 doi = {10.1007/3-540-65193-4_29},
263 pages = {368--394},
264 editor = {Grzegorz Rozenberg and Frits W. Vaandrager},
265 chapter = {},
266 year = {1998},
267 volume = {1494},
268 address = {London},
269 publisher = {Springer-Verlag},
270 booktitle = {Lectures on Embedded Systems},
271 series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
272 title = {Statecarts in use: structured analysis and object-orientation},
273 author = {Bruce P. Douglass and David Harel and Mark B. Trakhtenbrot},
274}
275
276@book{Knuth97,
277 note = {},
278 month = {},
279 series = {},
280 number = {},
281 volume = {},
282 editor = {},
283 edition = {},
284 address = {},
285 year = {1997},
286 publisher = {Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.},
287 title = {The Art of Computer Programming, Vol. 1: Fundamental Algorithms (3rd. ed.)},
288 author = {Donald E. Knuth},
289}
290
291@book{Knuth98,
292 note = {(book)},
293 month = {},
294 number = {},
295 editor = {},
296 url = {},
297 doi = {},
298 publisher = {Addison Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.},
299 address = {},
300 edition = {3rd},
301 volume = {1},
302 series = {Fundamental Algorithms},
303 title = {The Art of Computer Programming},
304 year = {1998},
305 author = {Donald E. Knuth},
306}
307
308@incollection{GM05,
309 editors = {Z. Ghahramani and R. Cowell},
310 month = {January},
311 publisher = {The Society for Artificial Intelligence and Statistics},
312 booktitle = {Proceedings of Tenth International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, {\rm The Barbados}},
313 year = {2005},
314 title = {Structured Variational Inference Procedures and their Realizations (as incol)},
315 author = {Dan Geiger and Christopher Meek},
316}
317
318@inproceedings{Smith10,
319 note = {},
320 organization = {},
321 month = {},
322 number = {},
323 url = {http://dx.doi.org/99.0000/woot07-S422},
324 doi = {99.9999/woot07-S422},
325 pages = {422--431},
326 address = {Milan Italy},
327 publisher = {Paparazzi Press},
328 year = {2010},
329 volume = {3},
330 editor = {Reginald N. Smythe and Alexander Noble},
331 series = {LAC '10},
332 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 3rd. annual workshop on Librarians and Computers},
333 title = {An experiment in bibliographic mark-up: Parsing metadata for XML export},
334 author = {Stan W. Smith},
335}
336
337@inproceedings{VanGundy07,
338 numpages = {9},
339 articleno = {Paper 7},
340 address = {Berkley, CA},
341 publisher = {USENIX Association},
342 series = {WOOT '07},
343 booktitle = {Proceedings of the first USENIX workshop on Offensive Technologies},
344 title = {Catch me, if you can: Evading network signatures with web-based polymorphic worms},
345 year = {2007},
346 author = {Matthew Van Gundy and Davide Balzarotti and Giovanni Vigna},
347}
348
349@inproceedings{VanGundy08,
350 pages = {99-100},
351 numpages = {2},
352 articleno = {7},
353 address = {Berkley, CA},
354 publisher = {USENIX Association},
355 series = {WOOT '08},
356 booktitle = {Proceedings of the first USENIX workshop on Offensive Technologies},
357 title = {Catch me, if you can: Evading network signatures with web-based polymorphic worms},
358 year = {2008},
359 author = {Matthew Van Gundy and Davide Balzarotti and Giovanni Vigna},
360}
361
362@inproceedings{VanGundy09,
363 pages = {90--100},
364 address = {Berkley, CA},
365 publisher = {USENIX Association},
366 series = {WOOT '09},
367 booktitle = {Proceedings of the first USENIX workshop on Offensive Technologies},
368 title = {Catch me, if you can: Evading network signatures with web-based polymorphic worms},
369 year = {2009},
370 author = {Matthew Van Gundy and Davide Balzarotti and Giovanni Vigna},
371}
372
373@inproceedings{Andler79,
374 note = {},
375 organization = {},
376 month = {},
377 number = {},
378 volume = {},
379 editor = {},
380 url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/567752.567774},
381 doi = {10.1145/567752.567774},
382 pages = {226--236},
383 address = {New York, NY},
384 publisher = {ACM Press},
385 year = {1979},
386 series = {POPL '79},
387 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 6th. ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of Programming Languages},
388 title = {Predicate Path expressions},
389 author = {Sten Andler},
390}
391
392@techreport{Harel78,
393 note = {},
394 month = {},
395 address = {Cambridge, MA},
396 number = {TR-200},
397 type = {MIT Research Lab Technical Report},
398 institution = {Massachusetts Institute of Technology},
399 title = {LOGICS of Programs: AXIOMATICS and DESCRIPTIVE POWER},
400 year = {1978},
401 author = {David Harel},
402}
403
404@mastersthesis{anisi03,
405 year = {2003},
406 intitution = {FOI-R-0961-SE, Swedish Defence Research Agency (FOI)},
407 school = {Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden},
408 title = {Optimal Motion Control of a Ground Vehicle},
409 author = {David A. Anisi},
410}
411
412@phdthesis{Clarkson85,
413 month = {},
414 type = {},
415 note = {UMI Order Number: AAT 8506171},
416 address = {Palo Alto, CA},
417 school = {Stanford University},
418 title = {Algorithms for Closest-Point Problems (Computational Geometry)},
419 year = {1985},
420 author = {Kenneth L. Clarkson},
421}
422
423@misc{Poker06,
424 url = {http://www.poker-edge.com/stats.php},
425 lastaccessed = {June 7, 2006},
426 title = {Stats and Analysis},
427 month = {March},
428 year = {2006},
429 author = {Poker-Edge.Com},
430}
431
432@misc{Obama08,
433 note = {},
434 lastaccessed = {March 21, 2008},
435 month = {March},
436 url = {http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6528042696351994555},
437 day = {5},
438 howpublished = {Video},
439 title = {A more perfect union},
440 year = {2008},
441 author = {Barack Obama},
442}
443
444@misc{JoeScientist001,
445 lastaccessed = {},
446 month = {August},
447 howpublished = {},
448 url = {},
449 note = {Patent No. 12345, Filed July 1st., 2008, Issued Aug. 9th., 2009},
450 title = {The fountain of youth},
451 year = {2009},
452 author = {Joseph Scientist},
453}
454
455@inproceedings{Novak03,
456 distincturl = {1},
457 organization = {},
458 series = {},
459 number = {},
460 volume = {},
461 editor = {},
462 howpublished = {Video},
463 note = {},
464 url = {http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6528042696351994555},
465 doi = {99.9999/woot07-S422},
466 month = {March 21, 2008},
467 pages = {4},
468 address = {New York, NY},
469 publisher = {ACM Press},
470 year = {2003},
471 booktitle = {ACM SIGGRAPH 2003 Video Review on Animation theater Program: Part I - Vol. 145 (July 27--27, 2003)},
472 title = {Solder man},
473 author = {Dave Novak},
474}
475
476@article{Lee05,
477 note = {},
478 howpublished = {Video},
479 url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1057270.1057278},
480 doi = {10.1145/1057270.1057278},
481 month = {Jan.-March},
482 number = {1},
483 volume = {3},
484 eid = {4},
485 journal = {Comput. Entertain.},
486 title = {Interview with Bill Kinder: January 13, 2005},
487 year = {2005},
488 author = {Newton Lee},
489}
490
491@article{rous08,
492 note = {To appear},
493 howpublished = {},
494 url = {},
495 doi = {},
496 articleno = {Article~5},
497 month = {July},
498 number = {3},
499 volume = {12},
500 journal = {Digital Libraries},
501 title = {The Enabling of Digital Libraries},
502 year = {2008},
503 author = {Bernard Rous},
504}
505
506@article{384253,
507 address = {New York, NY, USA},
508 publisher = {ACM},
509 doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/351827.384253},
510 pages = {11},
511 issn = {1084-6654},
512 year = {2000},
513 volume = {5},
514 journal = {J. Exp. Algorithmics},
515 title = {(old) Finding minimum congestion spanning trees},
516 author = {Werneck,, Renato and Setubal,, Jo\~{a}o and da Conceic\~{a}o,, Arlindo},
517}
518
519@article{Werneck:2000:FMC:351827.384253,
520 address = {New York, NY, USA},
521 publisher = {ACM},
522 acmid = {384253},
523 doi = {10.1145/351827.384253},
524 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=351827.384253},
525 articleno = {11},
526 issn = {1084-6654},
527 year = {2000},
528 month = {December},
529 volume = {5},
530 journal = {J. Exp. Algorithmics},
531 title = {(new) Finding minimum congestion spanning trees},
532 author = {Werneck, Renato and Setubal, Jo\~{a}o and da Conceic\~{a}o, Arlindo},
533}
534
535@article{1555162,
536 address = {Amsterdam, The Netherlands, The Netherlands},
537 publisher = {Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.},
538 doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2009.01.002},
539 pages = {342--353},
540 issn = {1566-2535},
541 year = {2009},
542 number = {4},
543 volume = {10},
544 journal = {Inf. Fusion},
545 title = {(old) Distributed data source verification in wireless sensor networks},
546 author = {Conti, Mauro and Di Pietro, Roberto and Mancini, Luigi V. and Mei, Alessandro},
547}
548
549@article{Conti:2009:DDS:1555009.1555162,
550 keywords = {Clone detection, Distributed protocol, Securing data fusion, Wireless sensor networks},
551 address = {Amsterdam, The Netherlands, The Netherlands},
552 publisher = {Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.},
553 acmid = {1555162},
554 doi = {10.1016/j.inffus.2009.01.002},
555 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1555009.1555162},
556 numpages = {12},
557 pages = {342--353},
558 issn = {1566-2535},
559 year = {2009},
560 month = {October},
561 number = {4},
562 volume = {10},
563 journal = {Inf. Fusion},
564 title = {(new) Distributed data source verification in wireless sensor networks},
565 author = {Conti, Mauro and Di Pietro, Roberto and Mancini, Luigi V. and Mei, Alessandro},
566}
567
568@inproceedings{Li:2008:PUC:1358628.1358946,
569 keywords = {cscw, distributed knowledge acquisition, incentive design, online games, recommender systems, reputation systems, user studies, virtual community},
570 address = {New York, NY, USA},
571 publisher = {ACM},
572 acmid = {1358946},
573 doi = {10.1145/1358628.1358946},
574 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1358628.1358946},
575 numpages = {6},
576 pages = {3873--3878},
577 location = {Florence, Italy},
578 isbn = {978-1-60558-012-X},
579 year = {2008},
580 booktitle = {CHI '08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems},
581 title = {Portalis: using competitive online interactions to support aid initiatives for the homeless},
582 author = {Li, Cheng-Lun and Buyuktur, Ayse G. and Hutchful, David K. and Sant, Natasha B. and Nainwal, Satyendra K.},
583}
584
585@book{Hollis:1999:VBD:519964,
586 address = {Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA},
587 publisher = {Prentice Hall PTR},
588 edition = {1st},
589 isbn = {0130850845},
590 year = {1999},
591 title = {Visual Basic 6: Design, Specification, and Objects with Other},
592 author = {Hollis, Billy S.},
593}
594
595@book{Goossens:1999:LWC:553897,
596 address = {Boston, MA, USA},
597 publisher = {Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.},
598 edition = {1st},
599 isbn = {0201433117},
600 year = {1999},
601 title = {The Latex Web Companion: Integrating TEX, HTML, and XML},
602 author = {Goossens, Michel and Rahtz, S. P. and Moore, Ross and Sutor, Robert S.},
603}
604
605@techreport{897367,
606 address = {Amherst, MA, USA},
607 publisher = {University of Massachusetts},
608 source = {http://www.ncstrl.org:8900/ncstrl/servlet/search?formname=detail\&id=oai%3Ancstrlh%3Aumass_cs%3Ancstrl.umassa_cs%2F%2FUM-CS-1987-018},
609 year = {1987},
610 title = {Vertex Types in Book-Embeddings},
611 author = {Buss, Jonathan F. and Rosenberg, Arnold L. and Knott, Judson D.},
612}
613
614@techreport{Buss:1987:VTB:897367,
615 address = {Amherst, MA, USA},
616 publisher = {University of Massachusetts},
617 source = {http://www.ncstrl.org:8900/ncstrl/servlet/search?formname=detail\&id=oai%3Ancstrlh%3Aumass_cs%3Ancstrl.umassa_cs%2F%2FUM-CS-1987-018},
618 year = {1987},
619 title = {Vertex Types in Book-Embeddings},
620 author = {Buss, Jonathan F. and Rosenberg, Arnold L. and Knott, Judson D.},
621}
622
623@proceedings{Czerwinski:2008:1358628,
624 address = {New York, NY, USA},
625 publisher = {ACM},
626 order_no = {608085},
627 location = {Florence, Italy},
628 isbn = {978-1-60558-012-X},
629 year = {2008},
630 title = {CHI '08: CHI '08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems},
631 note = {General Chair-Czerwinski, Mary and General Chair-Lund, Arnie and Program Chair-Tan, Desney},
632 author = {},
633}
634
635@phdthesis{Clarkson:1985:ACP:911891,
636 address = {Stanford, CA, USA},
637 school = {Stanford University},
638 note = {AAT 8506171},
639 year = {1985},
640 title = {Algorithms for Closest-Point Problems (Computational Geometry)},
641 advisor = {Yao, Andrew C.},
642 author = {Clarkson, Kenneth Lee},
643}
644
645@article{1984:1040142,
646 address = {New York, NY, USA},
647 publisher = {ACM},
648 issue_date = {January/April 1984},
649 number = {5-1},
650 volume = {13-14},
651 issn = {0146-4833},
652 year = {1984},
653 journal = {SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev.},
654 key = {{$\!\!$}},
655}
656
657@inproceedings{2004:ITE:1009386.1010128,
658 address = {Washington, DC, USA},
659 publisher = {IEEE Computer Society},
660 acmid = {1010128},
661 doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICWS.2004.64},
662 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICWS.2004.64},
663 pages = {21--22},
664 isbn = {0-7695-2167-3},
665 year = {2004},
666 series = {ICWS '04},
667 booktitle = {Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services},
668 title = {IEEE TCSC Executive Committee},
669 key = {IEEE},
670}
671
672@book{Mullender:1993:DS:302430,
673 address = {New York, NY, USA},
674 publisher = {ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.},
675 isbn = {0-201-62427-3},
676 year = {1993},
677 title = {Distributed systems (2nd Ed.)},
678 editor = {Mullender, Sape},
679}
680
681@techreport{Petrie:1986:NAD:899644,
682 address = {Austin, TX, USA},
683 publisher = {University of Texas at Austin},
684 source = {http://www.ncstrl.org:8900/ncstrl/servlet/search?formname=detail\&id=oai%3Ancstrlh%3Autexas_cs%3AUTEXAS_CS%2F%2FAI86-33},
685 year = {1986},
686 title = {New Algorithms for Dependency-Directed Backtracking (Master's thesis)},
687 author = {Petrie, Charles J.},
688}
689
690@mastersthesis{Petrie:1986:NAD:12345,
691 address = {Austin, TX, USA},
692 school = {University of Texas at Austin},
693 source = {http://www.ncstrl.org:8900/ncstrl/servlet/search?formname=detail\&id=oai%3Ancstrlh%3Autexas_cs%3AUTEXAS_CS%2F%2FAI86-33},
694 year = {1986},
695 title = {New Algorithms for Dependency-Directed Backtracking (Master's thesis)},
696 author = {Petrie, Charles J.},
697}
698
699@book{book-minimal,
700 year = {1981},
701 publisher = {Addison-Wesley},
702 title = {Seminumerical Algorithms},
703 author = {Donald E. Knuth},
704}
705
706@incollection{KA:2001,
707 address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
708 publisher = {IGI Publishing},
709 acmid = {887010},
710 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=887006.887010},
711 numpages = {24},
712 pages = {51--74},
713 isbn = {1-59140-056-2},
714 year = {2001},
715 booktitle = {E-commerce and cultural values},
716 title = {The implementation of electronic commerce in SMEs in Singapore (as Incoll)},
717 author = {Kong, Wei-Chang},
718}
719
720@inbook{KAGM:2001,
721 address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
722 publisher = {IGI Publishing},
723 acmid = {887010},
724 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=887006.887010},
725 numpages = {24},
726 pages = {51--74},
727 isbn = {1-59140-056-2},
728 year = {2001},
729 title = {E-commerce and cultural values},
730 chapter = {The implementation of electronic commerce in SMEs in Singapore (Inbook-w-chap-w-type)},
731 type = {Name of Chapter:},
732 author = {Kong, Wei-Chang},
733}
734
735@incollection{Kong:2002:IEC:887006.887010,
736 note = {},
737 month = {},
738 type = {},
739 number = {},
740 isbn = {1-59140-056-2},
741 acmid = {887010},
742 numpages = {24},
743 pages = {51--74},
744 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=887006.887010},
745 publisher = {IGI Publishing},
746 address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
747 year = {2002},
748 booktitle = {E-commerce and cultural values (Incoll-w-text (chap 9) 'title')},
749 title = {Chapter 9},
750 editor = {Theerasak Thanasankit},
751 author = {Kong, Wei-Chang},
752}
753
754@incollection{Kong:2003:IEC:887006.887011,
755 address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
756 publisher = {IGI Publishing},
757 acmid = {887010},
758 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=887006.887010},
759 numpages = {24},
760 pages = {51--74},
761 isbn = {1-59140-056-2},
762 year = {2003},
763 editor = {Thanasankit, Theerasak},
764 booktitle = {E-commerce and cultural values},
765 title = {The implementation of electronic commerce in SMEs in Singapore (Incoll)},
766 author = {Kong, Wei-Chang},
767}
768
769@inbook{Kong:2004:IEC:123456.887010,
770 note = {},
771 month = {},
772 type = {},
773 number = {},
774 isbn = {1-59140-056-2},
775 acmid = {887010},
776 numpages = {24},
777 pages = {51--74},
778 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=887006.887010},
779 publisher = {IGI Publishing},
780 address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
781 year = {2004},
782 chapter = {9},
783 title = {E-commerce and cultural values - (InBook-num-in-chap)},
784 editor = {Theerasak Thanasankit},
785 author = {Kong, Wei-Chang},
786}
787
788@inbook{Kong:2005:IEC:887006.887010,
789 note = {},
790 month = {},
791 number = {},
792 isbn = {1-59140-056-2},
793 acmid = {887010},
794 numpages = {24},
795 pages = {51--74},
796 type = {Chapter:},
797 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=887006.887010},
798 publisher = {IGI Publishing},
799 address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
800 year = {2005},
801 chapter = {The implementation of electronic commerce in SMEs in Singapore},
802 title = {E-commerce and cultural values (Inbook-text-in-chap)},
803 editor = {Theerasak Thanasankit},
804 author = {Kong, Wei-Chang},
805}
806
807@inbook{Kong:2006:IEC:887006.887010,
808 note = {},
809 month = {},
810 number = {},
811 isbn = {1-59140-056-2},
812 acmid = {887010},
813 numpages = {24},
814 pages = {51--74},
815 type = {Chapter (in type field)},
816 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=887006.887010},
817 publisher = {IGI Publishing},
818 address = {Hershey, PA, USA},
819 year = {2006},
820 chapter = {22},
821 title = {E-commerce and cultural values (Inbook-num chap)},
822 editor = {Theerasak Thanasankit},
823 author = {Kong, Wei-Chang},
824}
825
826@article{SaeediMEJ10,
827 pages = {185--194},
828 year = {2010},
829 month = {April},
830 number = {4},
831 volume = {41},
832 journal = {Microelectron. J.},
833 title = {A library-based synthesis methodology for reversible logic},
834 author = {Mehdi Saeedi and Morteza Saheb Zamani and Mehdi Sedighi},
835}
836
837@article{SaeediJETC10,
838 year = {2010},
839 month = {December},
840 number = {4},
841 volume = {6},
842 journal = {J. Emerg. Technol. Comput. Syst.},
843 title = {Synthesis of Reversible Circuit Using Cycle-Based Approach},
844 author = {Mehdi Saeedi and Morteza Saheb Zamani and Mehdi Sedighi and Zahra Sasanian},
845}
846
847@article{Kirschmer:2010:AEI:1958016.1958018,
848 keywords = {ideal classes, maximal orders, number theory, quaternion algebras},
849 address = {Philadelphia, PA, USA},
850 publisher = {Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics},
851 acmid = {1958018},
852 doi = {https://doi.org/10.1137/080734467},
853 url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/080734467},
854 numpages = {34},
855 pages = {1714--1747},
856 issn = {0097-5397},
857 year = {2010},
858 month = {January},
859 number = {5},
860 volume = {39},
861 issue_date = {January 2010},
862 journal = {SIAM J. Comput.},
863 title = {Algorithmic Enumeration of Ideal Classes for Quaternion Orders},
864 author = {Kirschmer, Markus and Voight, John},
865}
866
867@incollection{Hoare:1972:CIN:1243380.1243382,
868 address = {London, UK, UK},
869 publisher = {Academic Press Ltd.},
870 acmid = {1243382},
871 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1243380.1243382},
872 numpages = {92},
873 pages = {83--174},
874 isbn = {0-12-200550-3},
875 year = {1972},
876 editor = {Dahl, O. J. and Dijkstra, E. W. and Hoare, C. A. R.},
877 booktitle = {Structured programming (incoll)},
878 title = {Chapter II: Notes on data structuring},
879 author = {Hoare, C. A. R.},
880}
881
882@incollection{Lee:1978:TQA:800025.1198348,
883 address = {New York, NY, USA},
884 publisher = {ACM},
885 acmid = {1198348},
886 doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/800025.1198348},
887 url = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/800025.1198348},
888 numpages = {4},
889 pages = {68--71},
890 isbn = {0-12-745040-8},
891 year = {1981},
892 editor = {Wexelblat, Richard L.},
893 booktitle = {History of programming languages I (incoll)},
894 title = {Transcript of question and answer session},
895 author = {Lee, Jan},
896}
897
898@incollection{Dijkstra:1979:GSC:1241515.1241518,
899 address = {Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA},
900 publisher = {Yourdon Press},
901 acmid = {1241518},
902 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1241515.1241518},
903 numpages = {7},
904 pages = {27--33},
905 isbn = {0-917072-14-6},
906 year = {1979},
907 booktitle = {Classics in software engineering (incoll)},
908 title = {Go to statement considered harmful},
909 author = {Dijkstra, E.},
910}
911
912@incollection{Wenzel:1992:TVA:146022.146089,
913 address = {New York, NY, USA},
914 publisher = {ACM},
915 acmid = {146089},
916 doi = {10.1145/146022.146089},
917 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=146022.146089},
918 numpages = {32},
919 pages = {257--288},
920 isbn = {0-201-54981-6},
921 year = {1992},
922 booktitle = {Multimedia interface design (incoll)},
923 title = {Three-dimensional virtual acoustic displays},
924 author = {Wenzel, Elizabeth M.},
925}
926
927@incollection{Mumford:1987:MES:54905.54911,
928 address = {New York, NY, USA},
929 publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons, Inc.},
930 acmid = {54911},
931 url = {http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=54905.54911},
932 numpages = {21},
933 pages = {135--155},
934 isbn = {0-471-91281-6},
935 year = {1987},
936 booktitle = {Critical issues in information systems research (incoll)},
937 title = {Managerial expert systems and organizational change: some critical research issues},
938 author = {Mumford, E.},
939}
940
941@article{clement1993retrospective,
942 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
943 year = {1993},
944 pages = {29--37},
945 number = {6},
946 volume = {36},
947 journal = {Communications of the ACM},
948 author = {Clement, Andrew and Van den Besselaar, Peter},
949 title = {A retrospective look at PD projects},
950}
951
952@inproceedings{birhane2022power,
953 series = {EAAMO '22},
954 location = {Arlington, VA, USA},
955 keywords = {Power, Justice, Participatory AI, Machine Learning},
956 numpages = {8},
957 articleno = {6},
958 booktitle = {Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization},
959 abstract = {Participatory approaches to artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are gaining momentum: the increased attention comes partly with the view that participation opens the gateway to an inclusive, equitable, robust, responsible and trustworthy AI. Among other benefits, participatory approaches are essential to understanding and adequately representing the needs, desires and perspectives of historically marginalized communities. However, there currently exists lack of clarity on what meaningful participation entails and what it is expected to do. In this paper we first review participatory approaches as situated in historical contexts as well as participatory methods and practices within the AI and ML pipeline. We then introduce three case studies in participatory AI. Participation holds the potential for beneficial, emancipatory and empowering technology design, development and deployment while also being at risk for concerns such as cooptation and conflation with other activities. We lay out these limitations and concerns and argue that as participatory AI/ML becomes in vogue, a contextual and nuanced understanding of the term as well as consideration of who the primary beneficiaries of participatory activities ought to be constitute crucial factors to realizing the benefits and opportunities that participation brings.},
960 doi = {10.1145/3551624.3555290},
961 url = {https://doi.org/10.1145/3551624.3555290},
962 address = {New York, NY, USA},
963 publisher = {Association for Computing Machinery},
964 isbn = {9781450394772},
965 year = {2022},
966 title = {Power to the People? Opportunities and Challenges for Participatory AI},
967 author = {Birhane, Abeba and Isaac, William and Prabhakaran, Vinodkumar and Diaz, Mark and Elish, Madeleine Clare and Gabriel, Iason and Mohamed, Shakir},
968}
969
970@book{boden2004creative,
971 address = {11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE},
972 publisher = {Routledge},
973 year = {2004},
974 author = {Boden, Margaret A},
975 title = {The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms},
976}
977
978@article{simonton2012taking,
979 publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
980 year = {2012},
981 pages = {97--106},
982 number = {2-3},
983 volume = {24},
984 journal = {Creativity research journal},
985 author = {Simonton, Dean Keith},
986 title = {Taking the US Patent Office criteria seriously: A quantitative three-criterion creativity definition and its implications},
987}
988
989@incollection{bodker2022participatory,
990 publisher = {Springer},
991 year = {2022},
992 pages = {5--13},
993 booktitle = {Participatory Design},
994 author = {B{\o}dker, Susanne and Dindler, Christian and Iversen, Ole S and Smith, Rachel C},
995 title = {What Is Participatory Design?},
996}
997
998@misc{Heikkila20222,
999 lastaccessed = {January 14, 2023},
1000 url = {https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/09/16/1059598/this-artist-is-dominating-ai-generated-art-and-hes-not-happy-about-it/},
1001 title = {This artist is dominating AI-generated art. And he’s not happy about it.},
1002 year = {2022},
1003 author = {Melissa Heikkilä},
1004}
1005
1006@misc{Press2023,
1007 lastaccessed = {March 6, 2023},
1008 url = {https://www.forbes.com/sites/gilpress/2023/03/06/generative-ai-and-the-future-of-creative-jobs/?sh=463a30506617},
1009 title = {Generative AI And The Future Of Creative Jobs},
1010 year = {2023},
1011 author = {Gil Press},
1012}
1013
1014@misc{braun2014can,
1015 publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
1016 year = {2014},
1017 pages = {26152},
1018 number = {1},
1019 volume = {9},
1020 journal = {International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being},
1021 author = {Braun, Virginia and Clarke, Victoria},
1022 title = {What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers?},
1023}
1024
1025@misc{sparkes2022ai,
1026 publisher = {Elsevier},
1027 year = {2022},
1028 author = {Sparkes, Matthew},
1029 title = {AI copyright},
1030}
1031
1032@inproceedings{zhang2018protecting,
1033 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
1034 year = {2018},
1035 pages = {159--172},
1036 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2018 on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security},
1037 author = {Zhang, Jialong and Gu, Zhongshu and Jang, Jiyong and Wu, Hui and Stoecklin, Marc Ph and Huang, Heqing and Molloy, Ian},
1038 title = {Protecting intellectual property of deep neural networks with watermarking},
1039}
1040
1041@inproceedings{long2020ai,
1042 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
1043 year = {2020},
1044 pages = {1--16},
1045 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems},
1046 author = {Long, Duri and Magerko, Brian},
1047 title = {What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations},
1048}
1049
1050@inproceedings{dove2017ux,
1051 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
1052 year = {2017},
1053 pages = {278--288},
1054 booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2017 chi conference on human factors in computing systems},
1055 author = {Dove, Graham and Halskov, Kim and Forlizzi, Jodi and Zimmerman, John},
1056 title = {UX design innovation: Challenges for working with machine learning as a design material},
1057}
1058
1059@article{vardi2021will,
1060 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
1061 year = {2021},
1062 pages = {7--7},
1063 number = {1},
1064 volume = {65},
1065 journal = {Communications of the ACM},
1066 author = {Vardi, Moshe Y},
1067 title = {Will AI destroy education?},
1068}
1069
1070@inproceedings{herring2009getting,
1071 publisher = {ACM New York, NY, USA},
1072 year = {2009},
1073 pages = {87--96},
1074 booktitle = {Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems},
1075 author = {Herring, Scarlett R and Chang, Chia-Chen and Krantzler, Jesse and Bailey, Brian P},
1076 title = {Getting inspired! Understanding how and why examples are used in creative design practice},
1077}
1078
1079@article{dorst2001creativity,
1080 publisher = {Elsevier},
1081 year = {2001},
1082 pages = {425--437},
1083 number = {5},
1084 volume = {22},
1085 journal = {Design studies},
1086 author = {Dorst, Kees and Cross, Nigel},
1087 title = {Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem--solution},
1088}
1089
1090@incollection{sanders2002user,
1091 publisher = {CRC Press},
1092 year = {2002},
1093 pages = {18--25},
1094 booktitle = {Design and the social sciences},
1095 author = {Sanders, Elizabeth B-N},
1096 title = {From user-centered to participatory design approaches},
1097}Attribution
arXiv:2303.08931v1
[cs.HC]
License: cc-by-4.0
