Generative AI technologies demand new practical and critical competencies, which call on design to respond to and foster these. We present an exploratory study guided by Research-through-Design, in which we partnered with a primary school to develop a constructionist curriculum centered on students interacting with a generative AI technology. We provide a detailed account of the design of and outputs from the curriculum and learning materials, finding centrally that the reflexive and prolonged ‘hands-on’ approach led to a co-development of students’ practical and critical competencies. From the study, we contribute guidance for designing constructionist approaches to generative AI technology education; further arguing to do so with ‘critical responsivity.’ We then discuss how HCI researchers may leverage constructionist strategies in designing interactions with generative AI technologies; and suggest that Research-through-Design can play an important role as a ‘rapid response methodology’ capable of reacting to fast-evolving, disruptive technologies such as generative AI.

Growing concerns over negligent or malicious uses of AI have increased the appetite for tools that help manage the risks of the technology. In 2018, licenses with behaviorial-use clauses (commonly referred to as Responsible AI Licenses) were proposed to give developers a framework for releasing AI assets while specifying their users to mitigate negative applications. As of the end of 2023, on the order of 40,000 software and model repositories have adopted responsible AI licenses licenses. Notable models licensed with behavioral use clauses include BLOOM (language) and LLaMA2 (language), Stable Diffusion (image), and GRID (robotics). This paper explores why and how these licenses have been adopted, and why and how they have been adapted to fit particular use cases. We use a mixed-methods methodology of qualitative interviews, clustering of license clauses, and quantitative analysis of license adoption. Based on this evidence we take the position that responsible AI licenses need standardization to avoid confusing users or diluting their impact. At the same time, customization of behavioral restrictions is also appropriate in some contexts (e.g., medical domains). We advocate for “standardized customization” that can meet users’ needs and can be supported via tooling.

Federated distillation (FD) is a popular novel algorithmic paradigm for Federated learning (FL), which achieves training performance competitive to prior parameter averaging-based methods, while additionally allowing the clients to train different model architectures, by distilling the client predictions on an unlabeled auxiliary set of data into a student model. In this work, we propose FedAUX, an extension to FD, which, under the same set of assumptions, drastically improves the performance by deriving maximum utility from the unlabeled auxiliary data. FedAUX modifies the FD training procedure in two ways: First, unsupervised pre-training on the auxiliary data is performed to find a suitable model initialization for the distributed training. Second, (ε, δ) -differentially private certainty scoring is used to weight the ensemble predictions on the auxiliary data according to the certainty of each client model. Experiments on large-scale convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and transformer models demonstrate that our proposed method achieves remarkable performance improvements over state-of-the-art FL methods, without adding appreciable computation, communication, or privacy cost. For instance, when training ResNet8 on non-independent identically distributed (i.i.d.) subsets of CIFAR10, FedAUX raises the maximum achieved validation accuracy from 30.4% to 78.1%, further closing the gap to centralized training performance. Code is available at https://github.com/fedl-repo/fedaux.

During a research project in which we developed a machine learning (ML) driven visualization system for non-ML experts, we reflected on interpretability research in ML, computer-supported collaborative work and human-computer interaction. We found that while there are manifold technical approaches, these often focus on ML experts and are evaluated in decontextualized empirical studies. We hypothesized that participatory design research may support the understanding of stakeholders' situated sense-making in our project, yet, found guidance regarding ML interpretability inexhaustive. Building on philosophy of technology, we formulated explanation strategies as an empirical-analytical lens explicating how technical explanations mediate the contextual preferences concerning people's interpretations. In this paper, we contribute a report of our proof-of-concept use of explanation strategies to analyze a co-design workshop with non-ML experts, methodological implications for participatory design research, design implications for explanations for non-ML experts and suggest further investigation of technological mediation theories in the ML interpretability space.