Cited by 5Ethics and Social Impacts of AIExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Law, AI, and Intellectual Property

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Co-Producing AI: Toward an Augmented, Participatory Lifecycle

Open access
Mushkani, Rashid, Berard, Hugo, Ammar, Toumadher, Chatonnier, Cassandre, Koseki, Shin·2025·Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

Abstract

Despite efforts to mitigate the inherent risks and biases of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms, these algorithms can disproportionately impact culturally marginalized groups. A range of approaches has been proposed to address or reduce these risks, including the development of ethical guidelines and principles for responsible AI, as well as technical solutions that promote algorithmic fairness. Drawing on design justice, expansive learning theory, and recent empirical work on participatory AI, we argue that mitigating these harms requires a fundamental re‑architecture of the AI production pipeline. This re‑design should center co‑production, diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI), and multidisciplinary collaboration. We introduce an augmented AI lifecycle consisting of five interconnected phases: co‑framing, co‑design, co‑implementation, co‑deployment, and co‑maintenance. The lifecycle is informed by four multidisciplinary workshops and grounded in themes of distributed authority and iterative knowledge exchange. Finally, we relate the proposed lifecycle to several leading ethical frameworks and outline key research questions that remain for scaling participatory governance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aies.v8i2.36674

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 90

  1. Aizenberg, E.; and & van den Hoven, J. 2020. Designing for human rights in AI. Big Data & Society, 7(2), 2053951720949566. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720949566. · DOI
  2. Alim, S.; and Adebayo, A. O. 2022. Ethics in artificial in- telligence: Issues and guidelines for developing acceptable AI systems. Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances, 11(3), 37-44.
  3. Ameri, F.; and Dutta, D. 2005. Product Lifecycle Manage- ment: Closing the Knowledge Loops. Computer-Aided De- sign and Applications, 2(5): 577-590.
  4. Angwin, J.; Larson, J.; Mattu, S.; and Kirchner, L. 2016. Machine Bias. In Ethics of Data and Analytics, chapter 37, 254-264.
  5. Arnstein, S. R. 1969. A Ladder Of Citizen Participa- tion. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Arslan, F. 2017. Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threat- ens Democracy, by Cathy O'Neil. Journal of In- formation Privacy and Security, 13(3), 157-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/15536548.2017.1357388. · DOI
  7. Asaro, P. M. 2000. Transforming society by transform- ing technology: The science and politics of participatory design. Accounting, Management and Information Tech- nologies, 10(4), 257-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959- 8022(00)00004-7. · DOI
  8. Ashley, A. J.; Loh, C. G.; Bubb, K.; and Durham, L. 2022. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Practices in Arts and Cul- tural Planning. Journal of Urban Affairs, 44(4-5): 727-747.
  9. Assal, H.; and Chiasson, S. 2018. Security in the Software Development Lifecycle. In Proceedings of the 14th Sympo- sium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2018), 281- 296. Baltimore, MD: USENIX Association. ISBN 978-1- 939133-10-6.
  10. Avellan, T.; Sharma, S.; and Turunen, M. 2020. AI for All: Defining the What, Why, and How of Inclusive AI. In Pro- ceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Academic Mindtrek, 142-144. New York, NY, USA: ACM. ISBN 978- 1-4503-7774-4.
  11. Barocas, S.; Hardt, M.; and Narayanan, A. 2023. Fairness and Machine Learning: Limitations and Opportunities. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-04861-3.
  12. Beaudouin, V.; Bloch, I.; Bounie, D.; Clémenc ¸on, S.; d'Alché Buc, F.; Eagan, J.; Maxwell, W.; Mozharovskyi, P.; and Parekh, J. 2020. Flexible and Context-Specific AI Ex- plainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.07703. · arXiv
  13. Bellamy, R. K. E.; Dey, K.; Hind, M.; Hoffman, S. C.; Houde, S.; Kannan, K.; Lohia, P.; Martino, J.; Mehta, S.; Mojsilovic, A.; Nagar, S.; Ramamurthy, K. N.; Richards, J. T.; Saha, D.; Sattigeri, P.; Singh, M.; Varshney, K. R.; and Zhang, Y. 2019. AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting and Mitigating Algorithmic Bias. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 63(4/5): 4:1-4:15.
  14. Bikakis, A.; and & Zheng, X. 2015. Multi-disciplinary Trends in Artificial Intelligence: 9th International Work- shop, MIWAI 2015, Fuzhou, China, November 13-15, 2015, Proceedings (Vol. 9426). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26181-2. · DOI
  15. Binns, R. 2020. On the apparent conflict between individ- ual and group fairness. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 514-524. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372864. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Birhane, A.; Isaac, W.; Prabhakaran, V.; Díaz, M.; Elish, M. C.; Gabriel, I.; and Mohamed, S. 2022. Power to the People? Opportunities and Challenges for Participatory AI. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization (EAAMO '22), 6:1-6:8. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery.
  17. Bisconti, P.; Orsitto, D.; Fedorczyk, F.; Brau, F.; Capasso, M.; Marinis, L. D.; Eken, H.; Merenda, F.; Forti, M.; Pacini, M.; and Schettini, C. 2023. Maximizing team synergy in AI-related interdisciplinary groups: An interdisciplinary-by- design iterative methodology. AI & Society, 38(4): 1443- 1452.
  18. Brayne, S. 2017. Big Data Surveillance: The Case of Policing. American Sociological Review, 82(5), 977-1008. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122417725865. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Buolamwini, J.; and & Gebru, T. 2018. Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification. Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fair- ness, Accountability and Transparency, 77-91.
  20. Burema, D.; Debowski-Weimann, N.; von Janowski, A.; Grabowski, J.; Maftei, M.; Jacobs, M.; van der Smagt, P.; and Benbouzid, D. 2023. A Sector-Based Approach to AI Ethics: Understanding Ethical Issues of AI-Related In- cidents Within Their Sectoral Context. In Proceedings of the 2023 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 705-714. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery.
  21. Burrell, J. 2016. How the machine 'thinks': Un- derstanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society, 3(1), 2053951715622512. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715622512. · DOI · Paper page
  22. Cachat-Rosset, G.; and & Klarsfeld, A. 2023. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Artificial Intelligence: An Evalu- ation of Guidelines. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 37(1), 2176618. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2023.2176618. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Calabrese Barton, A.; and & Tan, E. 2020. Beyond Eq- uity as Inclusion: A Framework of "Rightful Presence" for Guiding Justice-Oriented Studies in Teaching and Learn- ing. Educational Researcher, 49(6), 433-440. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20927363. · DOI
  24. Costanza-Chock, S. 2020. Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. ISBN 9780262043458.
  25. Creswell, J. W. 2013. Qualitative Inquiry and Research De- sign: Choosing Among Five Approaches. SAGE.
  26. de Hond, A. A. H.; van Buchem, M. M.; and Hernandez- Boussard, T. 2022. Picture a Data Scientist: A Call to Action for Increasing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Age of AI. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Associa- tion, 29(12): 2178-2181.
  27. De Silva, D.; and Alahakoon, D. 2022. An artificial intelli- gence life cycle: From conception to production. Patterns, 3(6), 100489.
  28. Demelenne, A.; Gou, M.-J.; Nys, G.; Parulski, C.; Crom- men, J.; Servais, A.-C.; and Fillet, M. 2020. Evaluation of Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography, Cap- illary Zone Electrophoresis and Drift Tube Ion-Mobility Quadrupole Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry for the Characterization of Phosphodiester and Phosphorothioate Oligonucleotides. Journal of Chromatography A, 1614, 460716. DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2019.460716. · DOI
  29. Deming, W. E. 1986. Out of the crisis. MIT Press.
  30. Divakaran, A.; Sridhar, A.; and Srinivasan, R. 2023. Broad- ening AI Ethics Narratives: An Indic Art View. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 2-11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013. 3593971. · DOI
  31. Donia, J.; and Shaw, J. A. 2021. Co-design and ethical arti- ficial intelligence for health: An agenda for critical research and practice. Big Data & Society, 8(2). https://doi.org/10. 1177/20539517211065248. · DOI
  32. Dwivedi, Y. K.; Hughes, L.; Ismagilova, E.; Aarts, G.; Coombs, C.; Crick, T.; Duan, Y.; Dwivedi, R.; Edwards, J.; Eirug, A.; Galanos, V.; Ilavarasan, P. V.; Janssen, M.; Jones, P.; Kar, A. K.; Kizgin, H.; Kronemann, B.; Lal, B.; Lu- cini, B.; Medaglia, R.; Meunier-FitzHugh, K. L.; Meunier- FitzHugh, L. C. L.; Misra, S.; Mogaji, E.; Sharma, S. K.; Singh, J. B.; Raghavan, V.; Raman, R.; Rana, N. P.; Samoth- rakis, S.; Spencer, J.; Tamilmani, K.; Tubadji, A.; Walton, P.; and Williams, M. D. 2021. Artificial Intelligence (AI): Mul- tidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportu- nities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. Interna- tional Journal of Information Management, 57: 101994.
  33. Dwork, C.; Hardt, M.; Pitassi, T.; Reingold, O.; and Zemel, R. 2012. Fairness through awareness. In Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Confer- ence (pp. 214-226). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2090236. 2090255. · DOI · Paper page
  34. Engeström, Y. 2014. Learning by Expanding: An Activity- Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9781139814744. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Engeström, Y.; and Sannino, A. 2010. Studies of expan- sive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.edurev.2009.12.002. European Commission. 2018. Ethics Guidelines for Trust- worthy AI. https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/ai-alliance- consultation. · DOI
  36. Gerdes, A. 2018. An Inclusive Ethical Design Perspec- tive for a Flourishing Future with Artificial Intelligent Sys- tems. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 9(4), 677-689. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2018. · DOI
  37. Gerdes, A. 2022. A participatory data-centric approach to AI Ethics by Design. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 36(1), 2009222. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2021.2009222. · DOI
  38. Gerdes, A.; and & Frandsen, T. F. 2023. A system- atic review of almost three decades of value sensitive design (VSD): What happened to the technical investi- gations? Ethics and Information Technology, 25(2), 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09700-2. · DOI
  39. Goggin, G.; and & Soldatic, K. 2022. Automated decision-making, digital inclusion and intersectional disabil- ities. New Media and Society, 24(2), 384-400. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211063173. · DOI
  40. Goggin, G.; Ellis, K.; and & Hawkins, W. 2019. Dis- ability at the centre of digital inclusion: Assessing a new moment in technology and rights. Com- munication Research and Practice, 5(3), 290-303. https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2019.1641061. · DOI
  41. Golpayegani, D.; Pandit, H. J.; and & Lewis, D. 2022. AIRO: An Ontology for Representing AI Risks Based on the Proposed EU AI Act and ISO Risk Management Stan- dards. In A. Dimou, S. Neumaier, T. Pellegrini, & S. Vahdati (Eds.), Studies on the Semantic Web. IOS Press. https://doi.org/10.3233/SSW220008. · DOI
  42. Gowaikar, S.; Berard, H.; Mushkani, R.; and Koseki, S. 2024. From Efficiency to Equity: Measuring Fairness in Preference Learning. arXiv:2410.18841. · arXiv
  43. Haakman, M.; Cruz, L.; Huijgens, H.; and van Deursen, A. 2021. AI lifecycle models need to be revised. Em- pirical Software Engineering, 26(5), 95. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s10664-021-09993-1. · DOI
  44. Hardt, M.; Price, E.; and Srebro, N. 2016. Equality of op- portunity in supervised learning. Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 29.
  45. Helbing, D.; Mahajan, S.; Hänggli, R.; Musso, A.; Haus- laden, C. I.; Carissimo, C.; Carpentras, D.; Stockinger, E.; Sánchez-Vaquerizo, J. A.; Yang, J. C.; Ballandies, M. C.; Korecki, M.; Dubey, R. K.; and Pournaras, E. 2023. Democ- racy by Design: Perspectives for Digitally Assisted, Partici- patory Upgrades of Society. Journal of Computational Sci- ence, 71: 102061.
  46. Hoffmann, J.; Borgeaud, S.; Mensch, A.; Buchatskaya, E.; Cai, T.; Rutherford, E.; de Las Casas, D.; Hendricks, L. A.; Welbl, J.; Clark, A.; Hennigan, T.; Noland, E.; Millican, K.; van den Driessche, G.; Damoc, B.; Guy, A.; Osindero, S.; Si- monyan, K.; Elsen, E.; Rae, J. W.; Vinyals, O.; and Sifre, L. 2022. Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.15556. · arXiv
  47. Huang, S.; Siddarth, D.; Lovitt, L.; Liao, T. I.; Durmus, E.; Tamkin, A.; and Ganguli, D. 2024. Collective constitutional ai: Aligning a language model with public input. In Proceed- ings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountabil- ity, and Transparency, 1395-1417.
  48. Hummer, W.; Muthusamy, V.; Rausch, T.; Dube, P.; El Maghraoui, K.; Murthi, A.; and Oum, P. 2019. Mod- elOps: Cloud-Based Lifecycle Management for Reliable and Trusted AI. 2019 IEEE International Conference on Cloud Engineering (IC2E), 113-120. https://doi.org/10. 1109/IC2E.2019.00025. · DOI · Paper page
  49. Ibrahim, R.; and Paulson, B. C. 2008. Discontinuity in organisations: Identifying business environments affecting efficiency of knowledge flows in Product Lifecycle Man- agement. International Journal of Product Lifecycle Man- agement, 3(1), 21-36. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPLM.2008. 019972. · DOI
  50. Jobin, A.; Ienca, M.; and Vayena, E. 2019. The global land- scape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389-399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Jordan, R. 2023. Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need: by S. Costanza-Chock, Mas- sachusetts, MIT Press, 2020, 360 pp., $25.00 (paperback), Open Access, ISBN: 9780262043458. Technical Commu- nication Quarterly, 32(1), 114-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10572252.2022.2130671. · DOI
  52. Kiritsis, D.; Bufardi, A.; and Xirouchakis, P. 2003. Re- search issues on product lifecycle management and infor- mation tracking using smart embedded systems. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 17(3), 189-202. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.aei.2004.09.005. · DOI
  53. Kirk, H. R.; Whitefield, A.; Röttger, P.; Bean, A.; Margatina, K.; Ciro, J.; Mosquera, R.; Bartolo, M.; Williams, A.; He, H.; Vidgen, B.; and Hale, S. A. 2024. The PRISM Align- ment Dataset: What Participatory, Representative and Indi- vidualised Human Feedback Reveals About the Subjective and Multicultural Alignment of Large Language Models. arXiv:2404.16019. · arXiv
  54. Korobenko, D.; Nikiforova, A.; and Sharma, R. 2024. To- wards a Privacy and Security-Aware Framework for Ethical AI: Guiding the Development and Assessment of AI Sys- tems. Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Confer- ence on Digital Government Research, 740-753.
  55. Lee, M. K.; Kusbit, D.; Kahng, A.; Kim, J. T.; Yuan, X.; Chan, A.; See, D.; Noothigattu, R.; Lee, S.; Psomas, A.; and Procaccia, A. D. 2019. WeBuildAI: Participatory Framework for Algorithmic Governance. Proc. ACM Hum.- Comput. Interact., 3(CSCW).
  56. Lember, V.; Brandsen, T.; and Tõnurist, P. 2019. The poten- tial impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co- creation. Public Management Review, 21(11), 1665-1686. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1619807. · DOI
  57. Lepri, B.; Oliver, N.; Letouzé, E.; Pentland, A.; and Vinck, P. 2018. Fair, Transparent, and Accountable Algorithmic Decision-Making Processes: The Premise, the Proposed So- lutions, and the Open Challenges. Philosophy & Technol- ogy, 31(4), 611-627. DOI: 10.1007/s13347-017-0279-x. · DOI · Paper page
  58. Li, F.; and Lu, Y. 2022. Human-AI interaction and ethics of AI: How well are we following the guidelines. Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium of Chinese CHI, 96- 104. https://doi.org/10.1145/3565698.3565773. · DOI
  59. McBride, K.; Nikiforova, A.; Lnenicka, M.; Kempeneer, S.; and Wolswinkel, J. 2023. The role of open government data and co-creation in crisis management: Initial concep- tual propositions from the COVID-19 pandemic. Info. Pol., 28(2), 219-238. https://doi.org/10.3233/IP-220057. · DOI
  60. Miller, T. 2019. Explanation in artificial intelligence: In- sights from the social sciences. Artificial Intelligence, 267, 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007. · DOI · Paper page
  61. Mitchell, M.; Wu, S.; Zaldivar, A.; Barnes, P.; Vasserman, L.; Hutchinson, B.; Spitzer, E.; Raji, I. D.; and Gebru, T. 2019. Model Cards for Model Reporting. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 220-229. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287596. · DOI · Paper page
  62. Mohamed, S.; Png, M.-T.; and Isaac, W. 2020. Decolonial AI: Decolonial Theory as Sociotechnical Foresight in Artifi- cial Intelligence. Philosophy & Technology, 33(4), 659-684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00405-8. · DOI · Paper page
  63. Mohammed, N. M.; Niazi, M.; Alshayeb, M.; and Mah- mood, S. 2017. Exploring software security approaches in software development lifecycle: A systematic mapping study. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 50, 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2016.10.001. · DOI · Paper page
  64. Mushkani, R.; Berard, H.; Cohen, A.; and Koseki, S. 2025a. Position: The Right to AI. arXiv:2501.17899v1. · arXiv
  65. Mushkani, R.; Berard, H.; and Koseki, S. 2025. Negotiative Alignment: Embracing Disagreement to Achieve Fairer Out- comes -Insights from Urban Studies. arXiv:2503.12613. · arXiv
  66. Mushkani, R.; Nayak, S.; Berard, H.; Cohen, A.; Koseki, S.; and Bertrand, H. 2025b. LIVS: A Pluralistic Alignment Dataset for Inclusive Public Spaces. arXiv:2503.01894. · arXiv
  67. Nayak, S.; Mushkani, R.; Berard, H.; Cohen, A.; Koseki, S.; and Bertrand, H. 2024. MID-Space: Aligning Diverse Com- munities' Needs to Inclusive Public Spaces. In Pluralistic Alignment Workshop at NeurIPS 2024.
  68. Nissenbaum, H. 2010. Privacy in context: Technology, pol- icy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press.
  69. NIST. 2023. Safeguarding International Science: Research Security Framework, National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Interagency/Internal Report 8484. DOI: 10.6028/NIST.IR.8484. · DOI
  70. Obaidat, M. A.; Obeidat, S.; Holst, J.; Al Hayajneh, A.; and Brown, J. 2020. A Comprehensive and Systematic Survey on the Internet of Things: Security and Privacy Challenges, Security Frameworks, Enabling Technologies, Threats, Vul- nerabilities and Countermeasures. Computers, 9(2), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers9020044. · DOI
  71. Pawar, A.; Ahirrao, S.; and Churi, P. P. 2018. Anonymiza- tion Techniques for Protecting Privacy: A Survey. 2018 IEEE Punecon, Pune, India, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ PUNECON.2018.8745425. · DOI
  72. Qian, M.; Lee, W. D.; and Schwanen, T. 2021. The Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Mo- bility Reductions in the Early Stage of England's COVID"'{19} Epidemic. Health & Place, 69, 102563. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2021.102563. · DOI
  73. Roth, W.-M. 2004. Introduction: "Activity Theory and Edu- cation: An Introduction". Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca1101\ · DOI
  74. Saunders, B.; Sim, J.; Kingstone, T.; Baker, S.; Waterfield, J.; Bartlam, B.; Burroughs, H.; and Jinks, C. 2018. Satura- tion in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893- 1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8. · DOI · Paper page
  75. Schiff, D.; Borenstein, J.; Biddle, J.; and Laas, K. 2021a. AI Ethics in the Public, Private, and NGO Sectors: A Re- view of a Global Document Collection. IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society, 2(1), 31-42. https://doi.org/10. 1109/TTS.2021.3052127. · DOI · Paper page
  76. Schiff, D.; Rakova, B.; Ayesh, A.; Fanti, A.; and Lennon, M. 2021b. Explaining the Principles to Practices Gap in AI. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 40(2), 81-94.
  77. Sculley, D.; Holt, G.; Golovin, D.; et al. 2015. Hidden tech- nical debt in machine learning systems. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 28, 2503-2511.
  78. Sloane, M.; Moss, E.; Awomolo, O.; and & Forlano, L. 2022. Participation Is not a Design Fix for Machine Learning. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1145/3551624.3555285. · DOI · Paper page
  79. Sorensen, T.; Moore, J.; Fisher, J.; Gordon, M.; Mireshghal- lah, N.; Rytting, C. M.; Ye, A.; Jiang, L.; Lu, X.; Dziri, N.; Althoff, T.; and Choi, Y. 2024. Position: A roadmap to plu- ralistic alignment. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning. JMLR.org.
  80. Terzi, S.; Bouras, A.; Dutta, D.; Garetti, M.; and Kiritsis, D. 2010. Product lifecycle management -from its his- tory to its new role. International Journal of Product Life- cycle Management, 4(4), 360-389. https://doi.org/10.1504/ IJPLM.2010.036489. The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. 2019. Ethically Aligned Design: A Vi- sion for Prioritizing Human Well-being with Autonomous and Intelligent Systems, First Edition. Accessed: 2025-05- 16. · DOI
  81. Turnhout, E.; Van Bommel, S.; and Aarts, N. 2010. How Participation Creates Citizens: Participatory Governance as Performative Practice. Ecology and Society, 15(4). https: //www.jstor.org/stable/26268213.
  82. Umbrello, S.; and van de Poel, I. 2021. Mapping value sen- sitive design onto AI for social good principles. AI and Ethics, 1(3), 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021- 00038-3. · DOI · Paper page
  83. Varanasi, R. A.; and Goyal, N. 2023. "It is currently hodge- podge": Examining AI/ML Practitioners' Challenges during Co-production of Responsible AI Values. Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580903. · DOI · Paper page
  84. Véliz, C. 2021. Privacy is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data. Penguin Books.
  85. Wang, A.; Ramaswamy, V. V.; and Russakovsky, O. 2022. Towards Intersectionality in Machine Learning: Including More Identities, Handling Underrepresentation, and Per- forming Evaluation. 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 336-349. https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3531146.3533101. · DOI
  86. Wang, D.; Ram, P.; Weidele, D. K. I.; Liu, S.; Muller, M.; Weisz, J. D.; Valente, A.; Chaudhary, A.; Torres, D.; Samu- lowitz, H.; and Amini, L. 2020. AutoAI: Automating the End-to-End AI Lifecycle with Humans-in-the-Loop. Pro- ceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces Companion, 77-78.
  87. Wong, R. Y.; Madaio, M. A.; and Merrill, N. 2023. See- ing Like a Toolkit: How Toolkits Envision the Work of AI Ethics. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer In- teraction, 7(CSCW1), Article 145. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3579621. · DOI · Paper page
  88. Wu, S. T.-I.; Demetriou, D.; and Husain, R. A. 2023. Honor Ethics: The Challenge of Globalizing Value Alignment in AI. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 593-602. https://doi.org/ 10.1145/3593013.3594026. · DOI
  89. Yu, K.-H.; Beam, A. L.; and Kohane, I. S. 2018. Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 2(10): 719-731.
  90. Zhao, Z.-Q.; Zheng, P.; Xu, S.-T.; and Wu, X. 2019. Ob- ject Detection with Deep Learning: A Review. IEEE Trans- actions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 30(11), 3212-3232.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 5

Metadata

Authors
Mushkani, R., Berard, H., Ammar, T., Chatonnier, C., & Koseki, S.
Affiliations
  • Mila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute (CA)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
Published
2025-10-15
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
1785-1799
ISSN
3065-8365 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4415230200
Cited by
5
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1
FWCI
5.08
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
Keywords
participatory AI, co-production, AI lifecycle, design justice, algorithmic fairness, algorithmic bias, diversity, equity, and inclusion, multidisciplinary collaboration, distributed authority, responsible AI, AI governance, co-design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review