Ophelia Deroy

John Dorsch, Ophelia Deroy

This study explores whether labeling AI as "trustworthy" or "reliable" influences user perceptions and acceptance of automotive AI technologies. Using a one-way between-subjects design, the research involved 478 online participants who were presented with guidelines for either trustworthy or reliable AI. Participants then evaluated three vignette scenarios and completed a modified version of the Technology Acceptance Model, which included variables such as perceived ease of use, human-like trust, and overall attitude. Although labeling AI as "trustworthy" did not significantly influence judgments on specific scenarios, it increased perceived ease of use and human-like trust, particularly benevolence. This suggests a positive impact on usability and an anthropomorphic effect on user perceptions. The study provides insights into how specific labels can influence attitudes toward AI technology.

Nadine Meertens, Suet Lee, Ophelia Deroy

Recent debates on artificial intelligence increasingly emphasise questions of AI consciousness and moral status, yet there remains little agreement on how such properties should be evaluated. In this paper, we argue that awareness offers a more productive and methodologically tractable alternative. We introduce a practical method for evaluating awareness across diverse systems, where awareness is understood as encompassing a system's abilities to process, store and use information in the service of goal-directed action. Central to this approach is the claim that any evaluation aiming to capture the diversity of artificial systems must be domain-sensitive, deployable at any scale, multidimensional, and enable the prediction of task performance, while generalising to the level of abilities for the sake of comparison. Given these four desiderata, we outline a structured approach to evaluating and comparing awareness profiles across artificial systems with differing architectures, scales, and operational domains. By shifting the focus from artificial consciousness to being just aware enough, this approach aims to facilitate principled assessment, support design and oversight, and enable more constructive scientific and public discourse.

Damián Ariel Furman, Juan Junqueras, Z. Burçe Gümüslü et al.

We present Reasons For and Against Vaccination (RFAV), a dataset for predicting reasons for and against vaccination, and scientific authorities used to justify them, annotated through nichesourcing and augmented using GPT4 and GPT3.5-Turbo. We show how it is possible to mine these reasons in non-structured text, under different task definitions, despite the high level of subjectivity involved and explore the impact of artificially augmented data using in-context learning with GPT4 and GPT3.5-Turbo. We publish the dataset and the trained models along with the annotation manual used to train annotators and define the task.