VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kars Alfrink
dblp:339/8907
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-7562-019XORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021
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.
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Human-AI interaction · 100% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100% |
Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computational social science and digital humanities
algorithmic decision-making |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Contestable Camera Cars: A Speculative Design Exploration of Public AI That Is Open and Responsive to Dispute · CHI 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
speculative design · 1.3semi-structured interviews · 1.3reflexive thematic analysis · 1.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Identifying Algorithmic Decision Subjects' Needs for Meaningful ContestabilityabstractContestability has been proposed as a key element in designing algorithmic decision-making processes that safeguard decision subjects' rights to dignity and autonomy. However, little is known about how contestability can be operationalized based on decision subjects' needs and preferences. We address this research gap by identifying decision subjects' information and procedural needs for enacting meaningful contestability. To this end, we chose an illegal holiday rental detection scenario as our case; a high-risk decision-making process in the public sector. We conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with citizens with experience renting their homes out and different levels of AI literacy. We found that decision subjects request interventions that facilitate (1) cooperation in sense-making, (2) support in contestation acts, and (3) appropriate responsibility attribution. Our results highlight the cooperative work behind contestability, and motivate future efforts to structure individual and collective action, to personalize explanations for contestability, and to open up sites of contestation in AI pipelines. Mireia Yurrita, Himanshu Verma 0001, Agathe Balayn, Kars Alfrink, Ujwal Gadiraju, Alessandro Bozzon |
Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. | 4 |
| 2023 | Contestable Camera Cars: A Speculative Design Exploration of Public AI That Is Open and Responsive to DisputeabstractLocal governments increasingly use artificial intelligence (AI) for automated decision-making. Contestability, making systems responsive to dispute, is a way to ensure they respect human rights to autonomy and dignity. We investigate the design of public urban AI systems for contestability through the example of camera cars: human-driven vehicles equipped with image sensors. Applying a provisional framework for contestable AI, we use speculative design to create a concept video of a contestable camera car. Using this concept video, we then conduct semi-structured interviews with 17 civil servants who work with AI employed by a large northwestern European city. The resulting data is analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify the main challenges facing the implementation of contestability in public AI. We describe how civic participation faces issues of representation, public AI systems should integrate with existing democratic practices, and cities must expand capacities for responsible AI development and operation. Kars Alfrink, Ianus Keller, Neelke Doorn, Gerd Kortuem |
CHI | 1 |