arXiv subjects

Kars Alfrink

Publications and source records attributed to Kars Alfrink.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Disentangling Innovation Practices in Automation-Adopting Organizations: a Co-Performance Perspective

As organizations increasingly adopt automation, innovation practitioners are responsible for selecting, adapting, testing, and implementing externally sourced innovations. However, little is known about how these upstream practices shape worker-automation arrangements, limiting our ability to intervene in innovation practice to address automation adoption challenges. To disentangle this relationship, we interviewed nine innovation practitioners at a major European airport pursuing long-term autonomous operations and analyzed their practices through a co-performance lens. We synthesize five co-performance design principles and examine where current practices align or conflict. Our findings reveal tensions: innovation practitioners prioritize full-automation arrangements while postponing human considerations; contextual constraints shape solutions, but openness to reconfiguration remains limited; and co-learning rarely extends beyond pilot phases. These insights provide HCI research and practice with guidance for reframing the conceptualization of automation, particularly by encouraging earlier consideration of human roles, promoting iterative visions, and recognizing workers as co-designers throughout innovation pipelines.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Two Means to an End Goal: Connecting Explainability and Contestability in the Regulation of Public Sector AI

Explainability and its emerging counterpart contestability have become important normative and design principles for trustworthy AI as they enable users and subjects to understand and challenge AI decisions. However, realizing these principles is difficult, as they assume different meanings in technical, legal, and organizational dimensions of AI regulation. To resolve this conceptual polysemy, in this paper, we present the findings of an interview study with 14 experts to examine the intersection and implementation of explainability and contestability, and their understanding in different research communities. We outline differentiations between descriptive and normative explainability, judicial and non-judicial channels of contestation, and individual and collective contestation action. We further describe the main points of friction in the realization of both principles, including the alignment between top-down and bottom-up regulation, the assignment of responsibility, and the need for interdisciplinary collaboration. Lastly, we formulate three recommendations for AI policy to implement both principles through a Regulation by Design perspective. We believe our contributions can inform policy-making and regulation of these core principles and enable more effective and equitable design, development, and deployment of trustworthy public AI systems.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Towards Meaningful Transparency in Civic AI Systems

Artificial intelligence has become a part of the provision of governmental services, from making decisions about benefits to issuing fines for parking violations. However, AI systems rarely live up to the promise of neutral optimisation, creating biased or incorrect outputs and reducing the agency of both citizens and civic workers to shape the way decisions are made. Transparency is a principle that can both help subjects understand decisions made about them and shape the processes behind those decisions. However, transparency as practiced around AI systems tends to focus on the production of technical objects that represent algorithmic aspects of decision making. These are often difficult for publics to understand, do not connect to potential for action, and do not give insight into the wider socio-material context of decision making. In this paper, we build on existing approaches that take a human-centric view on AI transparency, combined with a socio-technical systems view, to develop the concept of meaningful transparency for civic AI systems: transparencies that allow publics to engage with AI systems that affect their lives, connecting understanding with potential for action.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2024

From Stem to Stern: Contestability Along AI Value Chains

This workshop will grow and consolidate a community of interdisciplinary CSCW researchers focusing on the topic of contestable AI. As an outcome of the workshop, we will synthesize the most pressing opportunities and challenges for contestability along AI value chains in the form of a research roadmap. This roadmap will help shape and inspire imminent work in this field. Considering the length and depth of AI value chains, it will especially spur discussions around the contestability of AI systems along various sites of such chains. The workshop will serve as a platform for dialogue and demonstrations of concrete, successful, and unsuccessful examples of AI systems that (could or should) have been contested, to identify requirements, obstacles, and opportunities for designing and deploying contestable AI in various contexts. This will be held primarily as an in-person workshop, with some hybrid accommodation. The day will consist of individual presentations and group activities to stimulate ideation and inspire broad reflections on the field of contestable AI. Our aim is to facilitate interdisciplinary dialogue by bringing together researchers, practitioners, and stakeholders to foster the design and deployment of contestable AI.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2023

Contestable Camera Cars: A Speculative Design Exploration of Public AI That Is Open and Responsive to Dispute

Local 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.

cs.HC↗