Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Courtney Heldreth
dblp:256/1050
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
3since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 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
2 papers |
Collaborative and social computing · 51% Design research and methods · 49% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Consensus and Subjectivity of Skin Tone Annotation for ML Fairness · NeurIPS 2023 |
Collaborative and social computing
community-based research |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | A Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis of Community-Collaborative Approaches to Computing Research · CHI 2022 |
Design research and methods
participatory research |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | A Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis of Community-Collaborative Approaches to Computing Research · CHI 2022 |
Collaborative and social computing
crowdsourcing |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Consensus and Subjectivity of Skin Tone Annotation for ML Fairness · NeurIPS 2023 |
Design research and methods
participatory design |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | A Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis of Community-Collaborative Approaches to Computing Research · CHI 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
crowdsourced labeling · 1.3annotation experiments · 1.3thematic analysis · 0.6systematic review · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Consensus and Subjectivity of Skin Tone Annotation for ML FairnessabstractUnderstanding different human attributes and how they affect model behavior may become a standard need for all model creation and usage, from traditional computer vision tasks to the newest multimodal generative AI systems. In computer vision specifically, we have relied on datasets augmented with perceived attribute signals (eg, gender presentation, skin tone, and age) and benchmarks enabled by these datasets. Typically labels for these tasks come from human annotators. However, annotating attribute signals, especially skin tone, is a difficult and subjective task. Perceived skin tone is affected by technical factors, like lighting conditions, and social factors that shape an annotator's lived experience.This paper examines the subjectivity of skin tone annotation through a series of annotation experiments using the Monk Skin Tone (MST) scale~\cite{Monk2022Monk}, a small pool of professional photographers, and a much larger pool of trained crowdsourced annotators. Along with this study we release the Monk Skin Tone Examples (MST-E) dataset, containing 1515 images and 31 videos spread across the full MST scale. MST-E is designed to help train human annotators to annotate MST effectively.Our study shows that annotators can reliably annotate skin tone in a way that aligns with an expert in the MST scale, even under challenging environmental conditions. We also find evidence that annotators from different geographic regions rely on different mental models of MST categories resulting in annotations that systematically vary across regions. Given this, we advise practitioners to use a diverse set of annotators and a higher replication count for each image when annotating skin tone for fairness research. Candice Schumann, Femi Olanubi, Auriel Wright, Ellis Monk Jr., Courtney Heldreth, Susanna Ricco |
NeurIPS | 5 |
| 2022 | A Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis of Community-Collaborative Approaches to Computing ResearchabstractHCI researchers have been gradually shifting attention from individual users to communities when engaging in research, design, and system development. However, our field has yet to establish a cohesive, systematic understanding of the challenges, benefits, and commitments of community-collaborative approaches to research. We conducted a systematic review and thematic analysis of 47 computing research papers discussing participatory research with communities for the development of technological artifacts and systems, published over the last two decades. From this review, we identified seven themes associated with the evolution of a project: from establishing community partnerships to sustaining results. Our findings suggest that several tensions characterize these projects, many of which relate to the power and position of researchers, and the computing research environment, relative to community partners. We discuss the implications of our findings and offer methodological proposals to guide HCI, and computing research more broadly, towards practices that center communities. Ned Cooper, Tiffanie Horne, Gillian R. Hayes, Courtney Heldreth, Michal Lahav, Jess Holbrook, Lauren Wilcox |
CHI | 4 |
| 2021 | Exciting, Useful, Worrying, Futuristic: Public Perception of Artificial Intelligence in 8 CountriesabstractAs the influence and use of artificial intelligence (AI) have grown and its transformative potential has become more apparent, many questions have been raised regarding the economic, political, social, and ethical implications of its use. Public opinion plays an important role in these discussions, influencing product adoption, commercial development, research funding, and regulation. In this paper we present results of an in-depth survey of public opinion of artificial intelligence conducted with 10,005 respondents spanning eight countries and six continents. We report widespread perception that AI will have significant impact on society, accompanied by strong support for the responsible development and use of AI, and also characterize the public's sentiment towards AI with four key themes (exciting, useful, worrying, and futuristic) whose prevalence distinguishes response to AI in different countries. Patrick Gage Kelley, Courtney Heldreth, Christopher Moessner, Aaron Sedley, Andreas Kramm, David T. Newman, Allison Woodruff |
AIES | 3 |