Comparing Socio-technical Design Principles with Guidelines for Human-centered AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.10331v1
• Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2026 14:15:54 GMT
• Title: Comparing Socio-technical Design Principles with Guidelines for Human-centered AI
• Abstract summary: Human-centered AI (HCAI) refers to guidelines or principles that aim on ethi-cally oriented design of systems.<n>We compare HCAI- guidelines with socio-technical systems that emerged in the context of conventional in-formation technology.
• Score: 1.5229257192293195
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Human-centered AI (HCAI) refers to guidelines or principles that aim on ethi-cally oriented design of systems. We compare HCAI- guidelines with princi-ples of socio-technical systems that emerged in the context of conventional in-formation technology. The comparison leads to a revision of socio-technical heuristics by including aspects of AI-usage. The comparison reveals that con-tinuous evolution is a basic characteristic of socio-technical systems, and that human oversight or interventions and the subsequent appropriation of AI-systems lead to continuous adaptation and re-design of the systems, if autono-my is collaboratively exercised. From a socio-technical point of view, the cru-cial requirement of transparency has not only to be fulfilled with technical fea-tures, but also by contributions of the whole system including human actors. It will be promising for using AI, if not only technical features, but organization-al and social practices are socio-technically designed in a way that compen-sates shortcomings of AI.

Related papers

• Keeping an Eye on AI: A Framework for Effective Human Oversight of AI Systems [46.60248293123689]
  This paper advances a practical framework for effective human oversight of AI systems.<n>It draws on insights from computer science, human-computer interaction, psychology, philosophy, and law.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T22:35:41Z)
• The Post-Turing Condition: Conceptualising Artificial Subjectivity and Synthetic Sociality [0.23332469289621782]
  In the Post-TurTuring era, artificial intelligence increasingly shapes social coordination and meaning formation.<n>The central challenge is whether processes of interpretation and shared reference are automated in ways that marginalize human participation.<n>This paper proposes Quadrangulation as a design principle for socially embedded AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T10:46:52Z)
• Position: Evaluating Generative AI Systems Is a Social Science Measurement Challenge [78.35388859345056]
  We argue that the ML community would benefit from learning from and drawing on the social sciences when developing measurement instruments for evaluating GenAI systems.<n>We present a four-level framework, grounded in measurement theory from the social sciences, for measuring concepts related to the capabilities, behaviors, and impacts of GenAI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-01T21:09:51Z)
• Aligning Generalisation Between Humans and Machines [74.120848518198]
  AI technology can support humans in scientific discovery and forming decisions, but may also disrupt democracies and target individuals.<n>The responsible use of AI and its participation in human-AI teams increasingly shows the need for AI alignment.<n>A crucial yet often overlooked aspect of these interactions is the different ways in which humans and machines generalise.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T18:36:07Z)
• Navigating the sociotechnical labyrinth: Dynamic certification for responsible embodied AI [19.959138971887395]
  We argue that sociotechnical requirements shape the governance of artificially intelligent (AI) systems. Our proposed transdisciplinary approach is designed to ensure the safe, ethical, and practical deployment of AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-16T08:35:26Z)
• Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment [109.57781720848669]
  We argue that the research community should explicitly define and critically reflect on "alignment" to account for the bidirectional and dynamic relationship between humans and AI.<n>We introduce the Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment framework, which not only incorporates traditional efforts to align AI with human values but also introduces the critical, underexplored dimension of aligning humans with AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• Roadmap on Incentive Compatibility for AI Alignment and Governance in Sociotechnical Systems [10.463105660497357]
  Existing methodologies primarily focus on technical facets, often neglecting the intricate sociotechnical nature of AI systems.<n>We posit a new problem worth exploring: Incentive Compatibility Sociotechnical Alignment Problem (ICSAP)<n>We discuss three classical game problems for achieving IC: mechanism design, contract theory, and Bayesian persuasion, in addressing the perspectives, potentials, and challenges of solving ICSAP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T10:52:57Z)
• Core and Periphery as Closed-System Precepts for Engineering General Intelligence [62.997667081978825]
  It is unclear if an AI system's inputs will be independent of its outputs, and, therefore, if AI systems can be treated as traditional components. This paper posits that engineering general intelligence requires new general systems precepts, termed the core and periphery.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-04T18:20:25Z)
• On some Foundational Aspects of Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence [52.03866242565846]
  There is no clear definition of what is meant by Human Centered Artificial Intelligence. This paper introduces the term HCAI agent to refer to any physical or software computational agent equipped with AI components. We see the notion of HCAI agent, together with its components and functions, as a way to bridge the technical and non-technical discussions on human-centered AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-29T09:58:59Z)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)
• Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systems [20.41177660318785]
  Social Transparency (ST) is a socio-technically informed perspective that incorporates the socio-organizational context into explaining AI-mediated decision-making. Our work contributes to the discourse of Human-Centered XAI by expanding the design space of XAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-12T19:44:27Z)
• Human-centered Explainable AI: Towards a Reflective Sociotechnical Approach [18.14698948294366]
  We introduce Human-centered Explainable AI (HCXAI) as an approach that puts the human at the center of technology design. It develops a holistic understanding of "who" the human is by considering the interplay of values, interpersonal dynamics, and the socially situated nature of AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-04T02:30:33Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.