Angela D. R. Smith

LG
h-index12
5papers
14citations
Novelty22%
AI Score33

5 Papers

8.2HCMay 7
The Capacity to Care: Designing Social Technology for Sustained Engagement With Societal Challenges

JaeWon Kim, Lindsay Popowski, Louisa Conwill et al.

People care about climate change, injustice, and humanitarian crises. The challenge is not apathy but capacity: sustained engagement with large-scale problems is psychologically costly, and social media architecture often amplifies awareness while providing few pathways to meaningful action. The result is rising distress, overwhelm, and disengagement -- particularly among young people who encounter global suffering through platforms designed for attention capture rather than constructive response. This workshop examines how social technology design shapes the conditions for sustained engagement with societal challenges. Drawing on Tronto's care ethics framework and research in moral psychology and platform studies, we ask why caring at scale is difficult and how social media can both exacerbate and potentially mitigate this difficulty. Tronto's framework shows that good care requires more than awareness: it demands responsibility, competence, and community. Dominant social media architectures stall the caring process at its earliest phase. We invite researchers and designers to identify platform designs that deplete or support the capacity to care, and to develop design directions for \textit{sustainable care}: engagement that people can maintain over time without burning out.

2.0LGFeb 8, 2023
(Re)Defining Expertise in Machine Learning Development

Mark Díaz, Angela D. R. Smith

Domain experts are often engaged in the development of machine learning systems in a variety of ways, such as in data collection and evaluation of system performance. At the same time, who counts as an 'expert' and what constitutes 'expertise' is not always explicitly defined. In this project, we conduct a systematic literature review of machine learning research to understand 1) the bases on which expertise is defined and recognized and 2) the roles experts play in ML development. Our goal is to produce a high-level taxonomy to highlight limits and opportunities in how experts are identified and engaged in ML research.

3.4SEDec 4, 2025
Towards A Cultural Intelligence and Values Inferences Quality Benchmark for Community Values and Common Knowledge

Brittany Johnson, Erin Reddick, Angela D. R. Smith

Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as a powerful technology, and thus, we have seen widespread adoption and use on software engineering teams. Most often, LLMs are designed as "general purpose" technologies meant to represent the general population. Unfortunately, this often means alignment with predominantly Western Caucasian narratives and misalignment with other cultures and populations that engage in collaborative innovation. In response to this misalignment, there have been recent efforts centered on the development of "culturally-informed" LLMs, such as ChatBlackGPT, that are capable of better aligning with historically marginalized experiences and perspectives. Despite this progress, there has been little effort aimed at supporting our ability to develop and evaluate culturally-informed LLMs. A recent effort proposed an approach for developing a national alignment benchmark that emphasizes alignment with national social values and common knowledge. However, given the range of cultural identities present in the United States (U.S.), a national alignment benchmark is an ineffective goal for broader representation. To help fill this gap in this US context, we propose a replication study that translates the process used to develop KorNAT, a Korean National LLM alignment benchmark, to develop CIVIQ, a Cultural Intelligence and Values Inference Quality benchmark centered on alignment with community social values and common knowledge. Our work provides a critical foundation for research and development aimed at cultural alignment of AI technologies in practice.

10.4LGOct 31, 2024
What Makes An Expert? Reviewing How ML Researchers Define "Expert"

Mark Díaz, Angela DR Smith

Human experts are often engaged in the development of machine learning systems to collect and validate data, consult on algorithm development, and evaluate system performance. At the same time, who counts as an 'expert' and what constitutes 'expertise' is not always explicitly defined. In this work, we review 112 academic publications that explicitly reference 'expert' and 'expertise' and that describe the development of machine learning (ML) systems to survey how expertise is characterized and the role experts play. We find that expertise is often undefined and forms of knowledge outside of formal education and professional certification are rarely sought, which has implications for the kinds of knowledge that are recognized and legitimized in ML development. Moreover, we find that expert knowledge tends to be utilized in ways focused on mining textbook knowledge, such as through data annotation. We discuss the ways experts are engaged in ML development in relation to deskilling, the social construction of expertise, and implications for responsible AI development. We point to a need for reflection and specificity in justifications of domain expert engagement, both as a matter of documentation and reproducibility, as well as a matter of broadening the range of recognized expertise.

7.1LGMay 6, 2025
A Preliminary Framework for Intersectionality in ML Pipelines

Michelle Nashla Turcios, Alicia E. Boyd, Angela D. R. Smith et al.

Machine learning (ML) has become a go-to solution for improving how we use, experience, and interact with technology (and the world around us). Unfortunately, studies have repeatedly shown that machine learning technologies may not provide adequate support for societal identities and experiences. Intersectionality is a sociological framework that provides a mechanism for explicitly considering complex social identities, focusing on social justice and power. While the framework of intersectionality can support the development of technologies that acknowledge and support all members of society, it has been adopted and adapted in ways that are not always true to its foundations, thereby weakening its potential for impact. To support the appropriate adoption and use of intersectionality for more equitable technological outcomes, we amplify the foundational intersectionality scholarship--Crenshaw, Combahee, and Collins (three C's), to create a socially relevant preliminary framework in developing machine-learning solutions. We use this framework to evaluate and report on the (mis)alignments of intersectionality application in machine learning literature.