arXiv subjects

Morgan Klaus Scheuerman

Publications and source records attributed to Morgan Klaus Scheuerman.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Who Bears the Cost of Honesty? A FAccT Workshop Synthesis and Research Agenda for Equitable AI Disclosure

AI disclosure is increasingly promoted and sometimes required as a route to transparency, accountability, provenance, and trust. Yet disclosure can also expose AI users to suspicion, stigma (e.g., competence penalties), and surveillance, affecting minoritized groups in particular. This paper reports on Who Bears the Cost of Honesty?, a CRAFT workshop at the 2026 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency that used scenario-anchored power mapping and design fiction to explore the benefits, harms, tensions, and power asymmetries that emerge under AI disclosure norms and mandates. We document the workshop design and analyze the disclosure approaches participants co-created, comprising four completed power maps, three context cards, and one interface prototype. These artifacts span education, workplace, politics/journalism, and interpersonal contexts. They depict disclosure as a multi-actor accountability process, surface concerns that the use of accessibility-related AI could be held against workers in performance evaluations, and explore how context-specific, bottom-up disclosures may support transparency while mitigating some risks of stigma and misinterpretation. We contribute (1) a documented two-stage workshop method; (2) an artifact-grounded thematic synthesis; and (3) a diagnostic framework, the Cost-of-Honesty Stack, with provisional design suggestions and research directions.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

A Taxonomy of Challenges to Curating Fair Datasets

Despite extensive efforts to create fairer machine learning (ML) datasets, there remains a limited understanding of the practical aspects of dataset curation. Drawing from interviews with 30 ML dataset curators, we present a comprehensive taxonomy of the challenges and trade-offs encountered throughout the dataset curation lifecycle. Our findings underscore overarching issues within the broader fairness landscape that impact data curation. We conclude with recommendations aimed at fostering systemic changes to better facilitate fair dataset curation practices.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2021

A Framework of Severity for Harmful Content Online

The proliferation of harmful content on online social media platforms has necessitated empirical understandings of experiences of harm online and the development of practices for harm mitigation. Both understandings of harm and approaches to mitigating that harm, often through content moderation, have implicitly embedded frameworks of prioritization - what forms of harm should be researched, how policy on harmful content should be implemented, and how harmful content should be moderated. To aid efforts of better understanding the variety of online harms, how they relate to one another, and how to prioritize harms relevant to research, policy, and practice, we present a theoretical framework of severity for harmful online content. By employing a grounded theory approach, we developed a framework of severity based on interviews and card-sorting activities conducted with 52 participants over the course of ten months. Through our analysis, we identified four Types of Harm (physical, emotional, relational, and financial) and eight Dimensions along which the severity of harm can be understood (perspectives, intent, agency, experience, scale, urgency, vulnerability, sphere). We describe how our framework can be applied to both research and policy settings towards deeper understandings of specific forms of harm (e.g., harassment) and prioritization frameworks when implementing policies encompassing many forms of harm.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

Do Datasets Have Politics? Disciplinary Values in Computer Vision Dataset Development

Data is a crucial component of machine learning. The field is reliant on data to train, validate, and test models. With increased technical capabilities, machine learning research has boomed in both academic and industry settings, and one major focus has been on computer vision. Computer vision is a popular domain of machine learning increasingly pertinent to real-world applications, from facial recognition in policing to object detection for autonomous vehicles. Given computer vision's propensity to shape machine learning research and impact human life, we seek to understand disciplinary practices around dataset documentation - how data is collected, curated, annotated, and packaged into datasets for computer vision researchers and practitioners to use for model tuning and development. Specifically, we examine what dataset documentation communicates about the underlying values of vision data and the larger practices and goals of computer vision as a field. To conduct this study, we collected a corpus of about 500 computer vision datasets, from which we sampled 114 dataset publications across different vision tasks. Through both a structured and thematic content analysis, we document a number of values around accepted data practices, what makes desirable data, and the treatment of humans in the dataset construction process. We discuss how computer vision datasets authors value efficiency at the expense of care; universality at the expense of contextuality; impartiality at the expense of positionality; and model work at the expense of data work. Many of the silenced values we identify sit in opposition with social computing practices. We conclude with suggestions on how to better incorporate silenced values into the dataset creation and curation process.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2020

Bringing the People Back In: Contesting Benchmark Machine Learning Datasets

In response to algorithmic unfairness embedded in sociotechnical systems, significant attention has been focused on the contents of machine learning datasets which have revealed biases towards white, cisgender, male, and Western data subjects. In contrast, comparatively less attention has been paid to the histories, values, and norms embedded in such datasets. In this work, we outline a research program - a genealogy of machine learning data - for investigating how and why these datasets have been created, what and whose values influence the choices of data to collect, the contextual and contingent conditions of their creation. We describe the ways in which benchmark datasets in machine learning operate as infrastructure and pose four research questions for these datasets. This interrogation forces us to "bring the people back in" by aiding us in understanding the labor embedded in dataset construction, and thereby presenting new avenues of contestation for other researchers encountering the data.

cs.CY↗