Emily McReynolds

dblp:167/5268 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Security and privacy · 1 · 1 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Network and information security
2 papers
Privacy and data protection · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Ubiquitous computing and smart environments · 77% Human-AI interaction · 23%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Privacy and data protection › privacy regulation
GDPR
0.812024
SoK: Technical Implementation and Human Impact of Internet Privacy Regulations · SP 2024
Privacy and data protection
privacy regulation
0.812024
SoK: Technical Implementation and Human Impact of Internet Privacy Regulations · SP 2024
Privacy and data protection › privacy of vulnerable populations
children's privacy
0.312017
Toys that Listen: A Study of Parents, Children, and Internet-Connected Toys · CHI 2017

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

taxonomy development · 1.5systematic literature review · 1.5interview study · 0.6
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 SoK: Technical Implementation and Human Impact of Internet Privacy Regulations
abstract
Growing recognition of the potential for exploitation of personal data and of the shortcomings of prior privacy regimes has led to the passage of a multitude of new privacy regulations. Some of these laws—notably the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)—have been the focus of large bodies of research by the computer science community, while others have received less attention. In this work, we analyze a set of 24 privacy laws and data protection regulations drawn from around the world—both those that have frequently been studied by computer scientists and those that have not—and develop a taxonomy of rights granted and obligations imposed by these laws. We then leverage this taxonomy to systematize 270 technical research papers published in computer science venues that investigate the impact of these laws and explore how technical solutions can complement legal protections. Finally, we analyze the results in this space through an inter-disciplinary lens and make recommendations for future work at the intersection of computer science and legal privacy.
Eleanor Birrell, Jay Rodolitz, Angel Ding, Jenna Lee, Emily McReynolds, Jevan A. Hutson, Ada Lerner
SP5
2022 Method cards for prescriptive machine-learning transparency
abstract
Specialized documentation techniques have been developed to communicate key facts about machine-learning (ML) systems and the datasets and models they rely on. Techniques such as Datasheets, AI FactSheets, and Model Cards have taken a mainly descriptive approach, providing various details about the system components. While the above information is essential for product developers and external experts to assess whether the ML system meets their requirements, other stakeholders might find it less actionable. In particular, ML engineers need guidance on how to mitigate potential shortcomings in order to fix bugs or improve the system's performance. We propose a documentation artifact that aims to provide such guidance in a prescriptive way. Our proposal, called Method Cards, aims to increase the transparency and reproducibility of ML systems by allowing stakeholders to reproduce the models, understand the rationale behind their designs, and introduce adaptations in an informed way. We showcase our proposal with an example in small object detection, and demonstrate how Method Cards can communicate key considerations that help increase the transparency and reproducibility of the detection model. We further highlight avenues for improving the user experience of ML engineers based on Method Cards.
David Adkins, Bilal Alsallakh, Adeel Cheema, Narine Kokhlikyan, Emily McReynolds, Pushkar Mishra, Chavez Procope, Jeremy Sawruk, Erin Wang, Polina Zvyagina
CAIN5
2017 Toys that Listen: A Study of Parents, Children, and Internet-Connected Toys
abstract
Hello Barbie, CogniToys Dino, and Amazon Echo are part of a new wave of connected toys and gadgets for the home that listen. Unlike the smartphone, these devices are always on, blending into the background until needed. We conducted interviews with parent-child pairs in which they interacted with Hello Barbie and CogniToys Dino, shedding light on children's expectations of the toys' "intelligence'" and parents' privacy concerns and expectations for parental controls. We find that children were often unaware that others might be able to hear what was said to the toy, and that some parents draw connections between the toys and similar tools not intended as toys (e.g., Siri, Alexa) with which their children already interact. Our findings illuminate people's mental models and experiences with these emerging technologies and will help inform the future designs of interactive, connected toys and gadgets. We conclude with recommendations for parents, designers, and policy makers.
Emily McReynolds, Sarah Hubbard, Timothy Lau, Aditya Saraf, Maya Cakmak, Franziska Roesner
CHI1