Maysa M. G. Macedo

Maysa M. Garcia de Macedo, Wyatt Clarke, Eli Lucherini et al.

Rapid technological innovation threatens to leave much of the global workforce behind. Today's economy juxtaposes white-hot demand for skilled labor against stagnant employment prospects for workers unprepared to participate in a digital economy. It is a moment of peril and opportunity for every country, with outcomes measured in long-term capital allocation and the life satisfaction of billions of workers. To meet the moment, governments and markets must find ways to quicken the rate at which the supply of skills reacts to changes in demand. More fully and quickly understanding labor market intelligence is one route. In this work, we explore the utility of time series forecasts to enhance the value of skill demand data gathered from online job advertisements. This paper presents a pipeline which makes one-shot multi-step forecasts into the future using a decade of monthly skill demand observations based on a set of recurrent neural network methods. We compare the performance of a multivariate model versus a univariate one, analyze how correlation between skills can influence multivariate model results, and present predictions of demand for a selection of skills practiced by workers in the information technology industry.

Heloisa Candello, Muneeza Azmat, Uma Sushmitha Gunturi et al.

With the rapid uptake of generative AI, investigating human perceptions of generated responses has become crucial. A major challenge is their `aptitude' for hallucinating and generating harmful contents. Despite major efforts for implementing guardrails, human perceptions of these mitigation strategies are largely unknown. We conducted a mixed-method experiment for evaluating the responses of a mitigation strategy across multiple-dimensions: faithfulness, fairness, harm-removal capacity, and relevance. In a within-subject study design, 57 participants assessed the responses under two conditions: harmful response plus its mitigation and solely mitigated response. Results revealed that participants' native language, AI work experience, and annotation familiarity significantly influenced evaluations. Participants showed high sensitivity to linguistic and contextual attributes, penalizing minor grammar errors while rewarding preserved semantic contexts. This contrasts with how language is often treated in the quantitative evaluation of LLMs. We also introduced new metrics for training and evaluating mitigation strategies and insights for human-AI evaluation studies.