Ready for What? Rethinking AI and Robotics Preparedness for Adoption and Policy

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.17520v1
• Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 08:44:36 GMT
• Title: Ready for What? Rethinking AI and Robotics Preparedness for Adoption and Policy
• Abstract summary: We analyse a repeated card-based survey in which 982 15,200 evaluations of 17 participants provided AI and robotics challenges.<n>Because participants evaluated multiple challenges, the design separates stable between-person differences from challenge-specific within-person differences.<n>Within same respondent, one point more complex than usual is associated with about 0.21 points lower readiness.
• Score: 1.9428749720455656
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Efforts to accelerate AI and robotics adoption require evidence about where communities are ready to act and where support is still needed. Yet averages across stakeholder groups can obscure relationships that emerge when the same person evaluates different challenges. We analyse a repeated card-based survey in which 982 participants provided 15,200 evaluations of 17 AI and robotics challenges. Each challenge was rated on 1-5 measures of significance, complexity and readiness, where readiness refers to perceived community preparedness and available resources rather than personal competence or realised adoption. Because participants evaluated multiple challenges, the design separates stable between-person differences from challenge-specific within-person deviations. Within the same respondent, a challenge rated one point more complex than usual is associated with about 0.21 points lower readiness (p less than 0.001). By contrast, respondents who generally rate challenges as more complex do not systematically report lower readiness (p=0.29). Significance is positively associated with readiness, while unusually high complexity modestly weakens this alignment. These relationships vary across challenge families, and professional background remains associated with adjusted preparedness. On applied cards, confidence, trust and related perceptions add substantial information about readiness, including for held-out participants. For policymakers and organisations, averaging across stakeholders can hide challenge-specific barriers. Readiness assessments should preserve both differences between stakeholder groups and variation within the same stakeholders across challenges. Effective adoption and literacy strategies should ask not only who appears ready, but which challenges they find unusually difficult and whether the likely constraint concerns implementation, capability, assurance or resources.

Related papers

• Whose readiness counts? Disagreement within and between sectors in perceived AI and robotics preparedness [3.364230370922355]
  Readiness is perceived community preparedness and available resources, not personal willingness or audited organisational capability.<n>Manufacturing has the highest mean readiness, yet shop-floor robotics, process-optimisation AI and general decision-support applications are judged differently.<n> Sector rankings are therefore best used as portfolio summaries rather than evidence that an industry is uniformly ready or behind.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-24T15:52:18Z)
• CLAIM: Leading Open-domain Active Clarification of Large Language Models with Uncertainty Measurement [50.91045324738942]
  CLAIM is an uncertainty-driven framework for active clarification learning in open-domain settings.<n>We propose an entropy-driven synthetic data generation pipeline that integrates uncertainty estimation with semantic clustering and reasoning-based judgments.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that CLAIM can learn stable and generalizable clarification strategies without relying on manually labeled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-12T04:27:45Z)
• From Affect to Complex Behavior: Advancing Multimodal Human-Centered AI at the 10th ABAW Workshop & Competition [60.17193786245766]
  The ABAW Competition introduces a diverse set of challenges targeting key aspects of affective and behavioral understanding.<n>The paper track presents a wide range of contributions spanning pose, motion & behavior estimation, affect modelling & multimodal learning, benchmarks, datasets & evaluation protocols, fairness, robustness & deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-24T17:44:37Z)
• First International StepUP Competition for Biometric Footstep Recognition: Methods, Results and Remaining Challenges [1.2679045974443117]
  First International StepUP Competition for Biometric Footstep Recognition was launched.<n>Competitors were tasked with developing robust recognition models using the StepUP-P150 dataset.<n>The top-performing team, Saeid_UCC, achieved the best equal error rate (EER) of 10.77%.<n>Overall, the competition showcased strong solutions, but persistent challenges in generalizing to unfamiliar footwear highlight a critical area for future work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-11T17:53:46Z)
• Human Identification at a Distance: Challenges, Methods and Results on the Competition HID 2025 [70.29305328364755]
  The International Competition on Human Identification at a Distance (HID) has been organized annually since 2020.<n>The best-performing method reached 94.2% accuracy, setting a new benchmark on this dataset.<n>We analyze key technical trends and outline potential directions for future research in gait recognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-07T14:22:17Z)
• Pathways of Thoughts: Multi-Directional Thinking for Long-form Personalized Question Answering [57.12316804290369]
  Personalization is essential for adapting question answering systems to user-specific information needs.<n>We propose Pathways of Thoughts (PoT), an inference-stage method that applies to any large language model (LLM) without requiring task-specific fine-tuning.<n>PoT consistently outperforms competitive baselines, achieving up to a 13.1% relative improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-23T14:44:46Z)
• Negotiative Alignment: Embracing Disagreement to Achieve Fairer Outcomes -- Insights from Urban Studies [1.3787753513429983]
  Disagreement patterns were systematic in our sample.<n>Group discussion reduced information gaps but not value conflicts.<n>Treating disagreement as signal and reporting worst-group outcomes alongside totals may help planners and AI practitioners surface trade-offs and preserve minority priorities while maintaining efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-16T18:55:54Z)
• Perception Gaps in Risk, Benefit, and Value Between Experts and Public Challenge Socially Accepted AI [0.0]
  This study examines how the general public and academic AI experts perceive AI's capabilities and impact.<n>The scenarios span domains such as sustainability, healthcare, job performance, societal inequality, art, and warfare.<n>Experts consistently anticipate higher probabilities, perceive lower risks, report greater benefits, and express more positive sentiment toward AI compared to the non-experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T12:51:45Z)
• Investigating the Impact of Interpersonal Challenges on Feeling Welcome in OSS [20.055675387635212]
  Interpersonal challenges can inhibit a feeling of welcomeness among contributors, particularly from underrepresented groups. Here, we investigate the effects of interpersonal challenges on the sense of welcomeness among diverse populations within OSS. We found that different challenges have unique impacts on how people feel welcomed, with variations across gender, race, and disability groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T15:11:50Z)
• Stateful Offline Contextual Policy Evaluation and Learning [88.9134799076718]
  We study off-policy evaluation and learning from sequential data. We formalize the relevant causal structure of problems such as dynamic personalized pricing. We show improved out-of-sample policy performance in this class of relevant problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-19T16:15:56Z)
• Unsupervised Person Re-Identification: A Systematic Survey of Challenges and Solutions [64.68497473454816]
  Unsupervised person Re-ID has drawn increasing attention for its potential to address the scalability issue in person Re-ID. Unsupervised person Re-ID is challenging primarily due to lacking identity labels to supervise person feature learning. This survey review recent works on unsupervised person Re-ID from the perspective of challenges and solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-01T00:01:35Z)
• Degrees of individual and groupwise backward and forward responsibility in extensive-form games with ambiguity, and their application to social choice problems [0.0]
  We present several different quantitative responsibility metrics that assess responsibility degrees in units of probability. We use a framework based on an adapted version of extensive-form game trees and an axiomatic approach. We find that while most properties one might desire of such responsibility metrics can be fulfilled by some variant, an optimal metric that clearly outperforms others has yet to be found.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-09T13:19:13Z)

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.