arXiv subjects

Jonathan Lazar

Publications and source records attributed to Jonathan Lazar.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

ColorA11Y: Enhancing Creative Design Workflows with Just-in-Time Color Accessibility Recommendations

Effective color contrast in visual design is essential for content accessibility. While existing tools can identify contrast issues, they often operate in isolation from design workflows or are used as an afterthought. We present ColorA11Y, a system that supports designers in creating accessible content by providing just-in-time feedback and actionable recommendations throughout the authoring process to meet accessibility color contrast guidelines. Our system analyzes the visual properties of text and background elements and offers recommended changes, including text color adjustments, background modifications, and opacity changes. Through two user studies, we evaluate ColorA11Y's effectiveness. A user preference study (n=40) revealed varying effectiveness of different recommendations based on design context, while a qualitative study with designers (n=8) indicated a more seamless workflow experience in comparison to a baseline using a color contrast checker. This work advances a born-accessible approach to design, where accessibility considerations are seamlessly integrated into the creative process rather than treated as an afterthought.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

What Cognitive Accessibility Reveals About Data Visualization

Data visualization aims to augment human cognition and make data accessible to diverse audiences. As data increasingly shapes participation and decision-making across many domains, there is a growing need to examine whether prevailing assumptions in visualization adequately reflect the diversity of human abilities, experiences, and needs. We argue that cognitive accessibility provides a critical lens for examining these questions and functions as a stress test for visualization theory. Drawing on cognitive accessibility research and our experiences studying accessible visualization, we identify three interconnected assumptions that shape visualization research and practice: assumptions about what forms of cognition visualization supports, how accessibility is defined and measured, and whose needs and abilities are centered in design and evaluation. Making these assumptions explicit reveals opportunities to rethink longstanding approaches and open new directions. Ultimately, we believe that cognitive accessibility can serve as a catalyst for innovation, expanding what visualization supports, whom it serves, and the roles it plays in people's lives.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Which Demographic Features Are Relevant for Individual Fairness Evaluation of U.S. Recidivism Risk Assessment Tools?

Despite its constitutional relevance, the technical ``individual fairness'' criterion has not been operationalized in U.S. state or federal statutes/regulations. We conduct a human subjects experiment to address this gap, evaluating which demographic features are relevant for individual fairness evaluation of recidivism risk assessment (RRA) tools. Our analyses conclude that the individual similarity function should consider age and sex, but it should ignore race.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

How May U.S. Courts Scrutinize Their Recidivism Risk Assessment Tools? Contextualizing AI Fairness Criteria on a Judicial Scrutiny-based Framework

The AI/HCI and legal communities have developed largely independent conceptualizations of fairness. This conceptual difference hinders the potential incorporation of technical fairness criteria (e.g., procedural, group, and individual fairness) into sustainable policies and designs, particularly for high-stakes applications like recidivism risk assessment. To foster common ground, we conduct legal research to identify if and how technical AI conceptualizations of fairness surface in primary legal sources. We find that while major technical fairness criteria can be linked to constitutional mandates such as ``Due Process'' and ``Equal Protection'' thanks to judicial interpretation, several challenges arise when operationalizing them into concrete statutes/regulations. These policies often adopt procedural and group fairness but ignore the major technical criterion of individual fairness. Regarding procedural fairness, judicial ``scrutiny'' categories are relevant but may not fully capture how courts scrutinize the use of demographic features in potentially discriminatory government tools like RRA. Furthermore, some policies contradict each other on whether to apply procedural fairness to certain demographic features. Thus, we propose a new framework, integrating U.S. demographics-related legal scrutiny concepts and technical fairness criteria, and contextualize it in three other major AI-adopting jurisdictions (EU, China, and India).

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

Toucha11y: Making Inaccessible Public Touchscreens Accessible

Despite their growing popularity, many public kiosks with touchscreens are inaccessible to blind people. Toucha11y is a working prototype that allows blind users to use existing inaccessible touchscreen kiosks independently and with little effort. Toucha11y consists of a mechanical bot that can be instrumented to an arbitrary touchscreen kiosk by a blind user and a companion app on their smartphone. The bot, once attached to a touchscreen, will recognize its content, retrieve the corresponding information from a database, and render it on the user's smartphone. As a result, a blind person can use the smartphone's built-in accessibility features to access content and make selections. The mechanical bot will detect and activate the corresponding touchscreen interface. We present the system design of Toucha11y along with a series of technical evaluations. Through a user study, we found out that Toucha11y could help blind users operate inaccessible touchscreen devices.

cs.RO↗

arXiv2022

Areas of Strategic Visibility: Disability Bias in Biometrics

This response to the RFI considers the potential for biometrics to help or harm disabled people2. Biometrics are already integrated into many aspects of daily life, from airport travel to mobile phone use. Yet many of these systems are not accessible to people who experience different kinds of disability exclusion . Different personal characteristics may impact any or all of the physical (DNA, fingerprints, face or retina) and behavioral (gesture, gait, voice) characteristics listed in the RFI as examples of biometric signals.

cs.CY↗