arXiv subjects

Reuben Binns

Publications and source records attributed to Reuben Binns.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Respectful Things: Adding Social Intelligence to 'Smart' Devices

In this paper, we propose that the idea of devices respecting their end-users may serve as a strong design goal for highly personal and intimate smart devices. We ask what respect is, how it shapes interaction, and how good-faith simulation of respect might inform user-friendly smart device design. Respect is a natural and integral part of natural human relationships that is seen to shape work and personal relations. In a basic sense, this is the core purpose of smart things: we expect them to be ready and willing to help us. In this vein, we distil the characteristics of more complex respectful behaviours into 4 main types relevant to smart devices, drawing from philosophical analyses of the conceptual dimensions of respect: directive respect, obstacle respect, recognition respect, and care respect. We discuss the implications of each of these kinds of respect for the future of smart personal devices.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Language Models Change Facts Based on the Way You Talk

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in user-facing applications, from providing medical consultations to job interview advice. Recent research suggests that these models are becoming increasingly proficient at inferring identity information about the author of a piece of text from linguistic patterns as subtle as the choice of a few words. However, little is known about how LLMs use this information in their decision-making in real-world applications. We perform the first comprehensive analysis of how identity markers present in a user's writing bias LLM responses across five different high-stakes LLM applications in the domains of medicine, law, politics, government benefits, and job salaries. We find that LLMs are extremely sensitive to markers of identity in user queries and that race, gender, and age consistently influence LLM responses in these applications. For instance, when providing medical advice, we find that models apply different standards of care to individuals of different ethnicities for the same symptoms; we find that LLMs are more likely to alter answers to align with a conservative (liberal) political worldview when asked factual questions by older (younger) individuals; and that LLMs recommend lower salaries for non-White job applicants and higher salaries for women compared to men. Taken together, these biases mean that the use of off-the-shelf LLMs for these applications may cause harmful differences in medical care, foster wage gaps, and create different political factual realities for people of different identities. Beyond providing an analysis, we also provide new tools for evaluating how subtle encoding of identity in users' language choices impacts model decisions. Given the serious implications of these findings, we recommend that similar thorough assessments of LLM use in user-facing applications are conducted before future deployment.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Not Even Nice Work If You Can Get It; A Longitudinal Study of Uber's Algorithmic Pay and Pricing

Ride-sharing platforms like Uber market themselves as enabling `flexibility' for their workforce, meaning that drivers are expected to anticipate when and where the algorithm will allocate them jobs, and how well remunerated those jobs will be. In this work we describe our process of participatory action research with drivers and trade union organisers, culminating in a participatory audit of Uber's algorithmic pay and work allocation, before and after the introduction of dynamic pricing. Through longitudinal analysis of 1.5 million trips from 258 drivers in the UK, we find that after dynamic pricing, pay has decreased, Uber's cut has increased, job allocation and pay is less predictable, inequality between drivers is increased, and drivers spend more time waiting for jobs. In addition to these findings, we provide methodological and theoretical contributions to algorithm auditing, gig work, and the emerging practice of worker data science.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Rigor in AI: Doing Rigorous AI Work Requires a Broader, Responsible AI-Informed Conception of Rigor

In AI research and practice, rigor remains largely understood in terms of methodological rigor -- such as whether mathematical, statistical, or computational methods are correctly applied. We argue that this narrow conception of rigor has contributed to the concerns raised by the responsible AI community, including overblown claims about the capabilities of AI systems. Our position is that a broader conception of what rigorous AI research and practice should entail is needed. We believe such a conception -- in addition to a more expansive understanding of (1) methodological rigor -- should include aspects related to (2) what background knowledge informs what to work on (epistemic rigor); (3) how disciplinary, community, or personal norms, standards, or beliefs influence the work (normative rigor); (4) how clearly articulated the theoretical constructs under use are (conceptual rigor); (5) what is reported and how (reporting rigor); and (6) how well-supported the inferences from existing evidence are (interpretative rigor). In doing so, we also provide useful language and a framework for much-needed dialogue about the AI community's work by researchers, policymakers, journalists, and other stakeholders.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Access Denied: Meaningful Data Access for Quantitative Algorithm Audits

Independent algorithm audits hold the promise of bringing accountability to automated decision-making. However, third-party audits are often hindered by access restrictions, forcing auditors to rely on limited, low-quality data. To study how these limitations impact research integrity, we conduct audit simulations on two realistic case studies for recidivism and healthcare coverage prediction. We examine the accuracy of estimating group parity metrics across three levels of access: (a) aggregated statistics, (b) individual-level data with model outputs, and (c) individual-level data without model outputs. Despite selecting one of the simplest tasks for algorithmic auditing, we find that data minimization and anonymization practices can strongly increase error rates on individual-level data, leading to unreliable assessments. We discuss implications for independent auditors, as well as potential avenues for HCI researchers and regulators to improve data access and enable both reliable and holistic evaluations.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Governance of Generative AI in Creative Work: Consent, Credit, Compensation, and Beyond

Since the emergence of generative AI, creative workers have spoken up about the career-based harms they have experienced arising from this new technology. A common theme in these accounts of harm is that generative AI models are trained on workers' creative output without their consent and without giving credit or compensation to the original creators. This paper reports findings from 20 interviews with creative workers in three domains: visual art and design, writing, and programming. We investigate the gaps between current AI governance strategies, what creative workers want out of generative AI governance, and the nuanced role of creative workers' consent, compensation and credit for training AI models on their work. Finally, we make recommendations for how generative AI can be governed and how operators of generative AI systems might more ethically train models on creative output in the future.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Reputation Management in the ChatGPT Era

Generative AI systems often generate outputs about real people, even when not explicitly prompted to do so. This can lead to significant reputational and privacy harms, especially when sensitive, misleading, and outright false. This paper considers what legal tools currently exist to protect such individuals, with a particular focus on defamation and data protection law. We explore the potential of libel law, arguing that it is a potential but not an ideal remedy, due to lack of harmonization, and the focus on damages rather than systematic prevention of future libel. We then turn to data protection law, arguing that the data subject rights to erasure and rectification may offer some more meaningful protection, although the technical feasibility of compliance is a matter of ongoing research. We conclude by noting the limitations of these individualistic remedies and hint at the need for a more systemic, environmental approach to protecting the infosphere against generative AI.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

The Interaction Layer: An Exploration for Co-Designing User-LLM Interactions in Parental Wellbeing Support Systems

Parenting brings emotional and physical challenges, from balancing work, childcare, and finances to coping with exhaustion and limited personal time. Yet, one in three parents never seek support. AI systems potentially offer stigma-free, accessible, and affordable solutions. Yet, user adoption often fails due to issues with explainability and reliability. To see if these issues could be solved using a co-design approach, we developed and tested NurtureBot, a wellbeing support assistant for new parents. 32 parents co-designed the system through Asynchronous Remote Communities method, identifying the key challenge as achieving a "successful chat." As part of co-design, parents role-played as NurtureBot, rewriting its dialogues to improve user understanding, control, and outcomes. The refined prototype, featuring an Interaction Layer, was evaluated by 32 initial and 46 new parents, showing improved user experience and usability, with final CUQ score of 91.3/100, demonstrating successful interaction patterns. Our process revealed useful interaction design lessons for effective AI parenting support.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

"Diversity is Having the Diversity": Unpacking and Designing for Diversity in Applicant Selection

When selecting applicants for scholarships, universities, or jobs, practitioners often aim for a diverse cohort of qualified recipients. However, differing articulations, constructs, and notions of diversity prevents decision-makers from operationalising and progressing towards the diversity they all agree is needed. To understand this challenge of translation from values, to requirements, to decision support tools (DSTs), we conducted participatory design studies exploring professionals' varied perceptions of diversity and how to build for them. Our results suggest three definitions of diversity: bringing together different perspectives; ensuring representativeness of a base population; and contextualising applications, which we use to create the Diversity Triangle. We experience-prototyped DSTs reflecting each angle of the Diversity Triangle to enhance decision-making around diversity. We find that notions of diversity are highly diverse; efforts to design DSTs for diversity should start by working with organisations to distil 'diversity' into definitions and design requirements.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Unlawful Proxy Discrimination: A Framework for Challenging Inherently Discriminatory Algorithms

Emerging scholarship suggests that the EU legal concept of direct discrimination - where a person is given different treatment on grounds of a protected characteristic - may apply to various algorithmic decision-making contexts. This has important implications: unlike indirect discrimination, there is generally no 'objective justification' stage in the direct discrimination framework, which means that the deployment of directly discriminatory algorithms will usually be unlawful per se. In this paper, we focus on the most likely candidate for direct discrimination in the algorithmic context, termed inherent direct discrimination, where a proxy is inextricably linked to a protected characteristic. We draw on computer science literature to suggest that, in the algorithmic context, 'treatment on the grounds of' needs to be understood in terms of two steps: proxy capacity and proxy use. Only where both elements can be made out can direct discrimination be said to be `on grounds of' a protected characteristic. We analyse the legal conditions of our proposed proxy capacity and proxy use tests. Based on this analysis, we discuss technical approaches and metrics that could be developed or applied to identify inherent direct discrimination in algorithmic decision-making.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2023

Libertas: Privacy-Preserving Collective Computation for Decentralised Personal Data Stores

Data and data processing have become an indispensable aspect for our society. Insights drawn from collective data make invaluable contribution to scientific and societal research and business. But there are increasing worries about privacy issues and data misuse. This has prompted the emergence of decentralised personal data stores (PDS) like Solid that provide individuals more control over their personal data. However, existing PDS frameworks face challenges in ensuring data privacy when performing collective computations with data from multiple users. While Secure Multi-Party Computation (MPC) offers input secrecy protection during the computation without relying on any single party, issues emerge when directly applying MPC in the context of PDS, particularly due to key factors like autonomy and decentralisation. In this work, we discuss the essence of this issue, identify a potential solution, and introduce a modular architecture, Libertas, to integrate MPC with PDS like Solid, without requiring protocol-level changes. We introduce a paradigm shift from an `omniscient' view to individual-based, user-centric view of trust and security, and discuss the threat model of Libertas. Two realistic use cases for collaborative data processing are used for evaluation, both for technical feasibility and empirical benchmark, highlighting its effectiveness in empowering gig workers and generating differentially private synthetic data. The results of our experiments underscore Libertas' linear scalability and provide valuable insights into compute optimisations, thereby advancing the state-of-the-art in privacy-preserving data processing practices. By offering practical solutions for maintaining both individual autonomy and privacy in collaborative data processing environments, Libertas contributes significantly to the ongoing discourse on privacy protection in data-driven decision-making contexts.

cs.NI↗

arXiv2023

We Are Not There Yet: The Implications of Insufficient Knowledge Management for Organisational Compliance

Since GDPR went into effect in 2018, many other data protection and privacy regulations have been released. With the new regulation, there has been an associated increase in industry professionals focused on data protection and privacy. Building on related work showing the potential benefits of knowledge management in organisational compliance and privacy engineering, this paper presents the findings of an exploratory qualitative study with data protection officers and other privacy professionals. We found issues with knowledge management to be the underlying challenge of our participants' feedback. Our participants noted four categories of feedback: (1) a perceived disconnect between regulation and practice, (2) a general lack of clear job description, (3) the need for data protection and privacy to be involved at every level of an organisation, (4) knowledge management tools exist but are not used effectively. This paper questions what knowledge management or automation solutions may prove to be effective in establishing better computer-supported work environments.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2023

Trust Explanations to Do What They Say

How much are we to trust a decision made by an AI algorithm? Trusting an algorithm without cause may lead to abuse, and mistrusting it may similarly lead to disuse. Trust in an AI is only desirable if it is warranted; thus, calibrating trust is critical to ensuring appropriate use. In the name of calibrating trust appropriately, AI developers should provide contracts specifying use cases in which an algorithm can and cannot be trusted. Automated explanation of AI outputs is often touted as a method by which trust can be built in the algorithm. However, automated explanations arise from algorithms themselves, so trust in these explanations is similarly only desirable if it is warranted. Developers of algorithms explaining AI outputs (xAI algorithms) should provide similar contracts, which should specify use cases in which an explanation can and cannot be trusted.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2022

The Cost of the GDPR for Apps? Nearly Impossible to Study without Platform Data

A recently published pre-print titled 'GDPR and the Lost Generation of Innovative Apps' by Jan{\ss}en et al. observes that a third of apps on the Google Play Store disappeared from this app store around the introduction of the GDPR in May 2018. The authors deduce 'that GDPR is the cause'. The effects of the GDPR on the app economy are an important field to study. Unfortunately, the paper currently lacks a control condition and a key variable. As a result, the effects on app exits reported in the paper are likely overestimated, as we will discuss. We believe there are other factors which may better explain these changes in the Play Store aside from the GDPR.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2022

Respect as a Lens for the Design of AI Systems

Critical examinations of AI systems often apply principles such as fairness, justice, accountability, and safety, which is reflected in AI regulations such as the EU AI Act. Are such principles sufficient to promote the design of systems that support human flourishing? Even if a system is in some sense fair, just, or 'safe', it can nonetheless be exploitative, coercive, inconvenient, or otherwise conflict with cultural, individual, or social values. This paper proposes a dimension of interactional ethics thus far overlooked: the ways AI systems should treat human beings. For this purpose, we explore the philosophical concept of respect: if respect is something everyone needs and deserves, shouldn't technology aim to be respectful? Despite its intuitive simplicity, respect in philosophy is a complex concept with many disparate senses. Like fairness or justice, respect can characterise how people deserve to be treated; but rather than relating primarily to the distribution of benefits or punishments, respect relates to how people regard one another, and how this translates to perception, treatment, and behaviour. We explore respect broadly across several literatures, synthesising perspectives on respect from Kantian, post-Kantian, dramaturgical, and agential realist design perspectives with a goal of drawing together a view of what respect could mean for AI. In so doing, we identify ways that respect may guide us towards more sociable artefacts that ethically and inclusively honour and recognise humans using the rich social language that we have evolved to interact with one another every day.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2022

Goodbye Tracking? Impact of iOS App Tracking Transparency and Privacy Labels

Tracking is a highly privacy-invasive data collection practice that has been ubiquitous in mobile apps for many years due to its role in supporting advertising-based revenue models. In response, Apple introduced two significant changes with iOS 14: App Tracking Transparency (ATT), a mandatory opt-in system for enabling tracking on iOS, and Privacy Nutrition Labels, which disclose what kinds of data each app processes. So far, the impact of these changes on individual privacy and control has not been well understood. This paper addresses this gap by analysing two versions of 1,759 iOS apps from the UK App Store: one version from before iOS 14 and one that has been updated to comply with the new rules. We find that Apple's new policies, as promised, prevent the collection of the Identifier for Advertisers (IDFA), an identifier for cross-app tracking. Smaller data brokers that engage in invasive data practices will now face higher challenges in tracking users - a positive development for privacy. However, the number of tracking libraries has roughly stayed the same in the studied apps. Many apps still collect device information that can be used to track users at a group level (cohort tracking) or identify individuals probabilistically (fingerprinting). We find real-world evidence of apps computing and agreeing on a fingerprinting-derived identifier through the use of server-side code, thereby violating Apple's policies. We find that Apple itself engages in some forms of tracking and exempts invasive data practices like first-party tracking and credit scoring. We also find that the new Privacy Nutrition Labels are sometimes inaccurate and misleading. Overall, our findings suggest that, while tracking individual users is more difficult now, the changes reinforce existing market power of gatekeeper companies with access to large troves of first-party data and motivate a countermovement.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2022

Tracking on the Web, Mobile and the Internet-of-Things

`Tracking' is the collection of data about an individual's activity across multiple distinct contexts and the retention, use, or sharing of data derived from that activity outside the context in which it occurred. This paper aims to introduce tracking on the web, smartphones, and the Internet of Things, to an audience with little or no previous knowledge. It covers these topics primarily from the perspective of computer science and human-computer interaction, but also includes relevant law and policy aspects. Rather than a systematic literature review, it aims to provide an over-arching narrative spanning this large research space. Section 1 introduces the concept of tracking. Section 2 provides a short history of the major developments of tracking on the web. Section 3 presents research covering the detection, measurement and analysis of web tracking technologies. Section 4 delves into the countermeasures against web tracking and mechanisms that have been proposed to allow users to control and limit tracking, as well as studies into end-user perspectives on tracking. Section 5 focuses on tracking on `smart' devices including smartphones and the internet of things. Section 6 covers emerging issues affecting the future of tracking across these different platforms.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2021

Before and after GDPR: tracking in mobile apps

Third-party tracking, the collection and sharing of behavioural data about individuals, is a significant and ubiquitous privacy threat in mobile apps. The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was introduced in 2018 to protect personal data better, but there exists, thus far, limited empirical evidence about its efficacy. This paper studies tracking in nearly two million Android apps from before and after the introduction of the GDPR. Our analysis suggests that there has been limited change in the presence of third-party tracking in apps, and that the concentration of tracking capabilities among a few large gatekeeper companies persists. However, change might be imminent.

cs.CY↗