Search

Gamification has become prevalent in educational settings, particularly in human-centered software engineering. Using gamified learning environments for comprehending software engineering concepts can significantly enhance students’ human factors, including motivation, engagement, and cognitive and critical thinking skills. Software requirements engineering constitutes one of the disciplines in the software development lifecycle. Based on the literature concerning agile-based software requirements engineering, coping with changing user requirements and constant alterations is often challenging. Consequently, both students and software developers must thoroughly grasp agile-based software requirements engineering. Over the last few years, educators and researchers have crafted gamified learning environments for agile-based software requirements engineering activities. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate the effectiveness of agile-based software requirements engineering activities through a gamified design approach. For this purpose, an application, ReGile, was developed and evaluated with 87 second and third-year software engineering students using the M-3 evaluation framework. Overall, the results were promising. Students expressed satisfaction with ReGile’s technological usability. They performed well (72.14%) in answering questions related to software requirements engineering and agile methodology concepts. Furthermore, gender-wise results indicated that male students outperformed female students when using ReGile.

Abstract In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) technology has been used in most if not all domains and has greatly benefited our lives. While AI can accurately extract critical features and valuable information from large amounts of data to help people complete tasks faster, there are growing concerns about the non-transparency of AI in the decision-making process. The emergence of explainable AI (XAI) has allowed humans to better understand and control AI systems, which is motivated to provide transparent explanations for the decisions made by AI. This article aims to present a comprehensive overview of recent research on XAI approaches from three well-defined taxonomies. We offer an in-depth analysis and summary of the status and prospects of XAI applications in several key areas where reliable explanations are urgently needed to avoid mistakes in decision-making. We conclude by discussing XAI’s limitations and future research directions.

In multimedia correspondence, steganography schemes are commonly applied. To reduce storage capacity, multimedia files, including images, are always compressed. Most steganographic video schemes are, therefore, not compression tolerant. In the frame sequences, the video includes extra hidden space. Artificial intelligence (AI) creates a digital world of real-time information for athletes, sponsors, and broadcasters. AI is reshaping business, and although it has already produced a significant impact on other sectors, the sports industry is the newest and most receptive one. Human-centered AI for web applications has substantially influenced audience participation, strategic plan execution, and other aspects of the sports industry that have traditionally relied heavily on statistics. Thus, this study presents the motion vector steganography of sports training video integrating with the artificial bee colony algorithm (MVS-ABC). The motion vector stenography detects the hidden information from the motion vectors in the sports training video bitstreams. Artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm optimizes the block assignment to inject a hidden message into a host video, in which the block assignment is considered a combinatorial optimization problem. The experimental analysis evaluates the data embedding performance using steganographic technology compared with existing embedding technologies, using the ABC algorithm compared with other genetic algorithms. The findings show that the proposed model can give the highest performance in terms of embedding capacity and the least error rate of video steganography compared with the existing models.

PurposeThe discourse on the human-centricity of AI at work needs contextualization. The aim of this study is to distinguish prevalent criteria of human-centricity for AI applications in the scientific discourse and to relate them to the work contexts for which they are specifically intended. This leads to configurations of actor-structure engagements that foster human-centricity in the workplace.Theoretical foundationThe study applies configurational theory to sociotechnical systems’ analysis of work settings. The assumption is that different approaches to promote human-centricity coexist, depending on the stakeholders responsible for their application.MethodThe exploration of criteria indicating human-centricity and their synthesis into configurations is based on a cross-disciplinary literature review following a systematic search strategy and a deductive-inductive qualitative content analysis of 101 research articles.ResultsThe article outlines eight criteria of human-centricity, two of which face challenges of human-centered technology development (trustworthiness and explainability), three challenges of human-centered employee development (prevention of job loss, health, and human agency and augmentation), and three challenges of human-centered organizational development (compensation of systems’ weaknesses, integration of user-domain knowledge, accountability, and safety culture). The configurational theory allows contextualization of these criteria from a higher-order perspective and leads to seven configurations of actor-structure engagements in terms of engagement for (1) data and technostructure, (2) operational process optimization, (3) operators’ employment, (4) employees’ wellbeing, (5) proficiency, (6) accountability, and (7) interactive cross-domain design. Each has one criterion of human-centricity in the foreground. Trustworthiness does not build its own configuration but is proposed to be a necessary condition in all seven configurations.DiscussionThe article contextualizes the overall debate on human-centricity and allows us to specify stakeholder-related engagements and how these complement each other. This is of high value for practitioners bringing human-centricity to the workplace and allows them to compare which criteria are considered in transnational declarations, international norms and standards, or company guidelines.

Human-centricity is considered a central aspect in the development and governance of artificial intelligence (AI). Various strategies and guidelines highlight the concept as a key goal. However, we argue that current uses of Human-Centered AI (HCAI) in policy documents and AI strategies risk downplaying promises of creating desirable, emancipatory technology that promotes human wellbeing and the common good. Firstly, HCAI, as it appears in policy discourses, is the result of aiming to adapt the concept of human-centered design (HCD) to the public governance context of AI but without proper reflection on how it should be reformed to suit the new task environment. Second, the concept is mainly used in reference to realizing human and fundamental rights, which are necessary, but not sufficient for technological emancipation. Third, the concept is used ambiguously in policy and strategy discourses, making it unclear how it should be operationalized in governance practices. This article explores means and approaches for using the HCAI approach for technological emancipation in the context of public AI governance. We propose that the potential for emancipatory technology development rests on expanding the traditional user-centered view of technology design to involve community- and society-centered perspectives in public governance. Developing public AI governance in this way relies on enabling inclusive governance modalities that enhance the social sustainability of AI deployment. We discuss mutual trust, transparency, communication, and civic tech as key prerequisites for socially sustainable and human-centered public AI governance. Finally, the article introduces a systemic approach to ethically and socially sustainable, human-centered AI development and deployment.

Abstract Robotics has a special place in AI as robots are connected to the real world and robots increasingly appear in humans everyday environment, from home to industry. Apart from cases were robots are expected to completely replace them, humans will largely benefit from real interactions with such robots. This is not only true for complex interaction scenarios like robots serving as guides, companions or members in a team, but also for more predefined functions like autonomous transport of people or goods. More and more, robots need suitable interfaces to interact with humans in a way that humans feel comfortable and that takes into account the need for a certain transparency about actions taken. The paper describes the requirements and state-of-the-art for a human-centered robotics research and development, including verbal and non-verbal interaction, understanding and learning from each other, as well as ethical questions that have to be dealt with if robots will be included in our everyday environment, influencing human life and societies.

In this paper, we address the challenge of believability in multiplayer video games. Our contribution is a system for assessing the believability of computer players. The state of the art examines existing methods and identifies seven distinguishing features that differ considerably from one assessment to the next. Our investigation reveals that assessment procedures typically alter gameplay, posing a considerable danger of bias. This is a major flaw since computer players are evaluated in a specific context rather than in the context of the game as it should be played, potentially skewing the findings of the evaluation. As a result, we begin on a trial-and-error process, with each new proposal building on the achievements of the previous one while removing the flaws. New proposals are tested with new assessments, a total of three experiments are then presented. We created a computer program that partially automates the execution of the assessment procedure, making these trials easier to implement. At the end, thanks to our proposal, gamers can assess the believability of computer players indirectly by employing reporting forms that alert users to the presence of bots. We assume that the more a bot is reported, the less credible it becomes. We ran a final experiment to test our proposal, which yielded extremely encouraging results.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) covers a broad spectrum of computational problems and use cases. Many of those implicate profound and sometimes intricate questions of how humans interact or should interact with AIs. Moreover, many users or future users do have abstract ideas of what AI is, significantly depending on the specific embodiment of AI applications. Human-centered-design approaches would suggest evaluating the impact of different embodiments on human perception of and interaction with AI. An approach that is difficult to realize due to the sheer complexity of application fields and embodiments in reality. However, here XR opens new possibilities to research human-AI interactions. The article’s contribution is twofold: First, it provides a theoretical treatment and model of human-AI interaction based on an XR-AI continuum as a framework for and a perspective of different approaches of XR-AI combinations. It motivates XR-AI combinations as a method to learn about the effects of prospective human-AI interfaces and shows why the combination of XR and AI fruitfully contributes to a valid and systematic investigation of human-AI interactions and interfaces. Second, the article provides two exemplary experiments investigating the aforementioned approach for two distinct AI-systems. The first experiment reveals an interesting gender effect in human-robot interaction, while the second experiment reveals an Eliza effect of a recommender system. Here the article introduces two paradigmatic implementations of the proposed XR testbed for human-AI interactions and interfaces and shows how a valid and systematic investigation can be conducted. In sum, the article opens new perspectives on how XR benefits human-centered AI design and development.