Search

Australia's National Science Agency conducted a six-month trial of M365 Copilot starting in January 2024 as part of an Australian Government initiative. Three hundred licenses were distributed across CSIRO using a persona-based approach to ensure diversity of roles and attributes among participants. As a scientific research organisation with a unique operational context, our objective was to study the use of M365 Copilot on enhancing productivity, efficiency, and creativity as well as overall satisfaction and ethical considerations. This paper presents the results from two surveys, conducted before and after the trial. The results showed mixed outcomes, with participants reporting improved productivity and efficiency in structured tasks such as meeting summaries and email drafting. Gaps were identified in advanced functionalities and integration, which limited Copilot's overall effectiveness. Satisfaction levels were generally positive, but user experiences varied in certain areas. Ethical concerns, particularly around data privacy, became more pronounced post-trial. These findings highlight Copilot's potential and the need for further refinement to meet users' diverse needs.

The rapid growth of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has underscored the urgent need for responsible AI practices. Despite increasing interest, a comprehensive AI risk assessment toolkit remains lacking. This study introduces our Responsible AI (RAI) Question Bank, a comprehensive framework and tool designed to support diverse AI initiatives. By integrating AI ethics principles such as fairness, transparency, and accountability into a structured question format, the RAI Question Bank aids in identifying potential risks, aligning with emerging regulations like the EU AI Act, and enhancing overall AI governance. A key benefit of the RAI Question Bank is its systematic approach to linking lower-level risk questions to higher-level ones and related themes, preventing siloed assessments and ensuring a cohesive evaluation process. Case studies illustrate the practical application of the RAI Question Bank in assessing AI projects, from evaluating risk factors to informing decision-making processes. The study also demonstrates how the RAI Question Bank can be used to ensure compliance with standards, mitigate risks, and promote the development of trustworthy AI systems. This work advances RAI by providing organizations with a valuable tool to navigate the complexities of ethical AI development and deployment while ensuring comprehensive risk management., Comment: 30 pages, 6 tables, 14 figures

Foundation model-enabled generative artificial intelligence facilitates the development and implementation of agents, which can leverage distinguished reasoning and language processing capabilities to takes a proactive, autonomous role to pursue users' goals. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic knowledge to guide practitioners in designing the agents considering challenges of goal-seeking (including generating instrumental goals and plans), such as hallucinations inherent in foundation models, explainability of reasoning process, complex accountability, etc. To address this issue, we have performed a systematic literature review to understand the state-of-the-art foundation model-based agents and the broader ecosystem. In this paper, we present a pattern catalogue consisting of 18 architectural patterns with analyses of the context, forces, and trade-offs as the outcomes from the previous literature review. We propose a decision model for selecting the patterns. The proposed catalogue can provide holistic guidance for the effective use of patterns, and support the architecture design of foundation model-based agents by facilitating goal-seeking and plan generation.

Foundation models, such as large language models (LLMs), have been widely recognised as transformative AI technologies due to their capabilities to understand and generate content, including plans with reasoning capabilities. Foundation model based agents derive their autonomy from the capabilities of foundation models, which enable them to autonomously break down a given goal into a set of manageable tasks and orchestrate task execution to meet the goal. Despite the huge efforts put into building foundation model based agents, the architecture design of the agents has not yet been systematically explored. Also, while there are significant benefits of using agents for planning and execution, there are serious considerations regarding responsible AI related software quality attributes, such as security and accountability. Therefore, this paper presents a pattern-oriented reference architecture that serves as guidance when designing foundation model based agents. We evaluate the completeness and utility of the proposed reference architecture by mapping it to the architecture of two real-world agents.

The advent of AI driven large language models (LLMs) have stirred discussions about their role in qualitative research. Some view these as tools to enrich human understanding, while others perceive them as threats to the core values of the discipline. This study aimed to compare and contrast the comprehension capabilities of humans and LLMs. We conducted an experiment with small sample of Alexa app reviews, initially classified by a human analyst. LLMs were then asked to classify these reviews and provide the reasoning behind each classification. We compared the results with human classification and reasoning. The research indicated a significant alignment between human and ChatGPT 3.5 classifications in one third of cases, and a slightly lower alignment with GPT4 in over a quarter of cases. The two AI models showed a higher alignment, observed in more than half of the instances. However, a consensus across all three methods was seen only in about one fifth of the classifications. In the comparison of human and LLMs reasoning, it appears that human analysts lean heavily on their individual experiences. As expected, LLMs, on the other hand, base their reasoning on the specific word choices found in app reviews and the functional components of the app itself. Our results highlight the potential for effective human LLM collaboration, suggesting a synergistic rather than competitive relationship. Researchers must continuously evaluate LLMs role in their work, thereby fostering a future where AI and humans jointly enrich qualitative research.

The rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI), represented by ChatGPT, has raised concerns about responsible AI development and utilization. Existing frameworks lack a comprehensive synthesis of AI risk assessment questions. To address this, we introduce QB4AIRA, a novel question bank developed by refining questions from five globally recognized AI risk frameworks, categorized according to Australia's AI ethics principles. QB4AIRA comprises 293 prioritized questions covering a wide range of AI risk areas, facilitating effective risk assessment. It serves as a valuable resource for stakeholders in assessing and managing AI risks, while paving the way for new risk frameworks and guidelines. By promoting responsible AI practices, QB4AIRA contributes to responsible AI deployment, mitigating potential risks and harms.

The recent release of large language model (LLM) based chatbots, such as ChatGPT, has attracted huge interest in foundation models. It is widely believed that foundation models will serve as the fundamental building blocks for future AI systems. As foundation models are in their early stages, the design of foundation model based systems has not yet been systematically explored. There is limited understanding about the impact of introducing foundation models in software architecture. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a taxonomy of foundation model based systems, which classifies and compares the characteristics of foundation models and design options of foundation model based systems. Our taxonomy comprises three categories: the pretraining and adaptation of foundation models, the architecture design of foundation model based systems, and responsible-AI-by-design. This taxonomy can serve as concrete guidance for making major architectural design decisions when designing foundation model based systems and highlights trade-offs arising from design decisions.

The release of ChatGPT, Gemini, and other large language model has drawn huge interests on foundations models. There is a broad consensus that foundations models will be the fundamental building blocks for future AI systems. However, there is a lack of systematic guidance on the architecture design. Particularly, the the rapidly growing capabilities of foundations models can eventually absorb other components of AI systems, posing challenges of moving boundary and interface evolution in architecture design. Furthermore, incorporating foundations models into AI systems raises significant concerns about responsible and safe AI due to their opaque nature and rapidly advancing intelligence. To address these challenges, the paper first presents an architecture evolution of AI systems in the era of foundation models, transitioning from "foundation-model-as-a-connector" to "foundation-model-as-a-monolithic architecture". The paper then identifies key design decisions and proposes a pattern-oriented reference architecture for designing responsible foundation-model-based systems. The patterns can enable the potential of foundation models while ensuring associated risks.

The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) has led to increasing concerns about the capability of AI systems to make decisions and behave responsibly. Responsible AI (RAI) refers to the development and use of AI systems that benefit humans, society, and the environment while minimising the risk of negative consequences. To ensure responsible AI, the risks associated with AI systems' development and use must be identified, assessed and mitigated. Various AI risk assessment frameworks have been released recently by governments, organisations, and companies. However, it can be challenging for AI stakeholders to have a clear picture of the available frameworks and determine the most suitable ones for a specific context. Additionally, there is a need to identify areas that require further research or development of new frameworks, as well as updating and maintaining existing ones. To fill the gap, we present a mapping study of 16 existing AI risk assessment frameworks from the industry, governments, and non-government organizations (NGOs). We identify key characteristics of each framework and analyse them in terms of RAI principles, stakeholders, system lifecycle stages, geographical locations, targeted domains, and assessment methods. Our study provides a comprehensive analysis of the current state of the frameworks and highlights areas of convergence and divergence among them. We also identify the deficiencies in existing frameworks and outlines the essential characteristics of a concrete and connected framework AI risk assessment (C$^2$AIRA) framework. Our findings and insights can help relevant stakeholders choose suitable AI risk assessment frameworks and guide the design of future frameworks towards concreteness and connectedness., Comment: [Camera-ready] Accepted by 2nd International Conference on AI Engineering - Software Engineering for AI (CAIN 2023)

The recent release of ChatGPT has gained huge attention and discussion worldwide, with responsible AI being a key topic of discussion. How can we ensure that AI systems, including ChatGPT, are developed and adopted in a responsible way? To tackle the responsible AI challenges, various ethical principles have been released by governments, organisations, and companies. However, those principles are very abstract and not practical enough. Further, significant efforts have been put on algorithm-level solutions that only address a narrow set of principles, such as fairness and privacy. To fill the gap, we adopt a pattern-oriented responsible AI engineering approach and build a Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue to operationalise responsible AI from a system perspective. In this article, we first summarise the major challenges in operationalising responsible AI at scale and introduce how we use the Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue to address those challenges. We then examine the risks at each stage of the chatbot development process and recommend pattern-driven mitigations to evaluate the the usefulness of the Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue in a real-world setting.

Human values such as honesty, social responsibility, fairness, privacy, and the like are things considered important by individuals and society. Software systems, including mobile software applications (apps), may ignore or violate such values, leading to negative effects in various ways for individuals and society. While some works have investigated different aspects of human values in software engineering, this mixed-methods study focuses on honesty as a critical human value. In particular, we studied (i) how to detect honesty violations in mobile apps, (ii) the types of honesty violations in mobile apps, and (iii) the perspectives of app developers on these detected honesty violations. We first develop and evaluate 7 machine learning (ML) models to automatically detect violations of the value of honesty in app reviews from an end user perspective. The most promising was a Deep Neural Network model with F1 score of 0.921. We then conducted a manual analysis of 401 reviews containing honesty violations and characterised honest violations in mobile apps into 10 categories: unfair cancellation and refund policies; false advertisements; delusive subscriptions; cheating systems; inaccurate information; unfair fees; no service; deletion of reviews; impersonation; and fraudulent looking apps. A developer survey and interview study with mobile developers then identified 7 key causes behind honesty violations in mobile apps and 8 strategies to avoid or fix such violations. The findings of our developer study also articulate the negative consequences that honesty violations might bring for businesses, developers, and users. Finally, the app developers' feedback shows that our prototype ML-based models can have promising benefits in practice., Comment: Submitted Empirical Software Engineering Journal. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2203.07547

Responsible AI is widely considered as one of the greatest scientific challenges of our time and is key to increase the adoption of AI. Recently, a number of AI ethics principles frameworks have been published. However, without further guidance on best practices, practitioners are left with nothing much beyond truisms. Also, significant efforts have been placed at algorithm-level rather than system-level, mainly focusing on a subset of mathematics-amenable ethical principles, such as fairness. Nevertheless, ethical issues can arise at any step of the development lifecycle, cutting across many AI and non-AI components of systems beyond AI algorithms and models. To operationalize responsible AI from a system perspective, in this paper, we present a Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue based on the results of a Multivocal Literature Review (MLR). Rather than staying at the principle or algorithm level, we focus on patterns that AI system stakeholders can undertake in practice to ensure that the developed AI systems are responsible throughout the entire governance and engineering lifecycle. The Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue classifies the patterns into three groups: multi-level governance patterns, trustworthy process patterns, and responsible-AI-by-design product patterns. These patterns provide systematic and actionable guidance for stakeholders to implement responsible AI.

As the deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) is changing many fields and industries, there are concerns about AI systems making decisions and recommendations without adequately considering various ethical aspects, such as accountability, reliability, transparency, explainability, contestability, privacy, and fairness. While many sets of AI ethics principles have been recently proposed that acknowledge these concerns, such principles are high-level and do not provide tangible advice on how to develop ethical and responsible AI systems. To gain insight on the possible implementation of the principles, we conducted an empirical investigation involving semi-structured interviews with a cohort of AI practitioners. The salient findings cover four aspects of AI system design and development, adapting processes used in software engineering: (i) high-level view, (ii) requirements engineering, (iii) design and implementation, (iv) deployment and operation., Comment: follow-up work to arXiv:2112.07467

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak quickly spread around the world, resulting in over 240 million infections and 4 million deaths by Oct 2021. While the virus is spreading from person to person silently, fear has also been spreading around the globe. The COVID-19 information from the Australian Government is convincing but not timely or detailed, and there is much information on social networks with both facts and rumors. As software engineers, we have spontaneously and rapidly constructed a COVID-19 information dashboard aggregating reliable information semi-automatically checked from different sources for providing one-stop information sharing site about the latest status in Australia. Inspired by the John Hopkins University COVID-19 Map, our dashboard contains the case statistics, case distribution, government policy, latest news, with interactive visualization. In this paper, we present a participant's in-person observations in which the authors acted as founders of https://covid-19-au.com/ serving more than 830K users with 14M page views since March 2020. According to our first-hand experience, we summarize 9 lessons for developers, researchers and instructors. These lessons may inspire the development, research and teaching in software engineer aspects for coping with similar public crises in the future.

The omnipresent nature of mobile applications (apps) in all aspects of daily lives raises the necessity of reflecting end-users values (e.g., fairness, honesty, etc.) in apps. However, there are limited considerations of end-users values in apps development. Value violations by apps have been reported in the media and are responsible for end-users dissatisfaction and negative socio-economic consequences. Value violations may bring more severe and lasting problems for marginalized and vulnerable end-users of apps, which have been explored less (if at all) in the software engineering community. However, understanding the values of the end-users of apps is the essential first step towards values-based apps development. This research aims to fill this gap by investigating the human values of Bangladeshi female farmers as a marginalized and vulnerable group of end-users of Bangladeshi agriculture apps. We conducted an empirical study that collected and analyzed data from a survey with 193 Bangladeshi female farmers to explore the underlying factor structure of the values of Bangladeshi female farmers and the significance of demographics on their values. The results identified three underlying factors of Bangladeshi female farmers. The first factor comprises of five values: benevolence, security, conformity, universalism, and tradition. The second factor consists of two values: self-direction and stimulation. The third factor includes three values: power, achievement, and hedonism. We also identified strong influences of demographics on some of the values of Bangladeshi female farmers. For example, area has significant impacts on three values: hedonism, achievement, and tradition. Similarly, there are also strong influences of household income on power and security., Comment: 44 pages, 7 figures, 8 tables, Journal of Systems and Software

Human values such as integrity, privacy, curiosity, security, and honesty are guiding principles for what people consider important in life. Such human values may be violated by mobile software applications (apps), and the negative effects of such human value violations can be seen in various ways in society. In this work, we focus on the human value of honesty. We present a model to support the automatic identification of violations of the value of honesty from app reviews from an end-user perspective. Beyond the automatic detection of honesty violations by apps, we also aim to better understand different categories of honesty violations expressed by users in their app reviews. The result of our manual analysis of our honesty violations dataset shows that honesty violations can be characterised into ten categories: unfair cancellation and refund policies; false advertisements; delusive subscriptions; cheating systems; inaccurate information; unfair fees; no service; deletion of reviews; impersonation; and fraudulent-looking apps. Based on these results, we argue for a conscious effort in developing more honest software artefacts including mobile apps, and the promotion of honesty as a key value in software development practices. Furthermore, we discuss the role of app distribution platforms as enforcers of ethical systems supporting human values, and highlight some proposed next steps for human values in software engineering (SE) research., Comment: 12 pages, Accepted for publication in 2022 IEEE/ACM 19th International Conference on Mining Software Repositories (MSR)

Although AI is transforming the world, there are serious concerns about its ability to behave and make decisions responsibly. Many ethical regulations, principles, and frameworks for responsible AI have been issued recently. However, they are high level and difficult to put into practice. On the other hand, most AI researchers focus on algorithmic solutions, while the responsible AI challenges actually crosscut the entire engineering lifecycle and components of AI systems. To close the gap in operationalizing responsible AI, this paper aims to develop a roadmap on software engineering for responsible AI. The roadmap focuses on (i) establishing multi-level governance for responsible AI systems, (ii) setting up the development processes incorporating process-oriented practices for responsible AI systems, and (iii) building responsible-AI-by-design into AI systems through system-level architectural style, patterns and techniques.

Although AI has significant potential to transform society, there are serious concerns about its ability to behave and make decisions responsibly. Many ethical regulations, principles, and guidelines for responsible AI have been issued recently. However, these principles are high-level and difficult to put into practice. In the meantime much effort has been put into responsible AI from the algorithm perspective, but they are limited to a small subset of ethical principles amenable to mathematical analysis. Responsible AI issues go beyond data and algorithms and are often at the system-level crosscutting many system components and the entire software engineering lifecycle. Based on the result of a systematic literature review, this paper identifies one missing element as the system-level guidance - how to design the architecture of responsible AI systems. We present a summary of design patterns that can be embedded into the AI systems as product features to contribute to responsible-AI-by-design.

As consensus across the various published AI ethics principles is approached, a gap remains between high-level principles and practical techniques that can be readily adopted to design and develop responsible AI systems. We examine the practices and experiences of researchers and engineers from Australia's national scientific research agency (CSIRO), who are involved in designing and developing AI systems for many application areas. Semi-structured interviews were used to examine how the practices of the participants relate to and align with a set of high-level AI ethics principles proposed by the Australian Government. The principles comprise: (1) privacy protection and security, (2) reliability and safety, (3) transparency and explainability, (4) fairness, (5) contestability, (6) accountability, (7) human-centred values, (8) human, social and environmental wellbeing. Discussions on the gained insights from the interviews include various tensions and trade-offs between the principles, and provide suggestions for implementing each high-level principle. We also present suggestions aiming to enhance associated support mechanisms., Comment: submitted to IEEE Transactions on Technology & Society

Human values, or what people hold important in their life, such as freedom, fairness, and social responsibility, often remain unnoticed and unattended during software development. Ignoring values can lead to values violations in software that can result in financial losses, reputation damage, and widespread social and legal implications. However, embedding human values in software is not only non-trivial but also generally an unclear process. Commencing as early as during the Requirements Engineering (RE) activities promises to ensure fit-for-purpose and quality software products that adhere to human values. But what is the impact of considering human values explicitly during early RE activities? To answer this question, we conducted a scenario-based survey where 56 software practitioners contextualised requirements analysis towards a proposed mobile application for the homeless and suggested values-laden software features accordingly. The suggested features were qualitatively analysed. Results show that explicit considerations of values can help practitioners identify applicable values, associate purpose with the features they develop, think outside-the-box, and build connections between software features and human values. Finally, drawing from the results and experiences of this study, we propose a scenario-based values elicitation process -- a simple four-step takeaway as a practical implication of this study., Comment: 17 pages, 8 images, 5 tables

Although artificial intelligence (AI) is solving real-world challenges and transforming industries, there are serious concerns about its ability to behave and make decisions in a responsible way. Many AI ethics principles and guidelines for responsible AI have been recently issued by governments, organisations, and enterprises. However, these AI ethics principles and guidelines are typically high-level and do not provide concrete guidance on how to design and develop responsible AI systems. To address this shortcoming, we first present an empirical study where we interviewed 21 scientists and engineers to understand the practitioners' perceptions on AI ethics principles and their implementation. We then propose a template that enables AI ethics principles to be operationalised in the form of concrete patterns and suggest a list of patterns using the newly created template. These patterns provide concrete, operationalised guidance that facilitate the development of responsible AI systems., Comment: Submitted to ICSE SEIP 2022

Given the ubiquity of mobile applications (apps) in daily lives, understanding and reflecting end-users' human values (e.g., transparency, privacy, social recognition etc.) in apps has become increasingly important. Violations of end users' values by software applications have been reported in the media and have resulted in a wide range of difficulties for end users. Value violations may bring more and lasting problems for marginalized and vulnerable groups of end-users. This research aims to understand the extent to which the values of Bangladeshi female farmers, marginalized and vulnerable end-users, who are less studied by the software engineering community, are reflected in agriculture apps in Bangladesh. Further to this, we aim to identify possible strategies to embed their values in those apps. To this end, we conducted a mixed-methods empirical study consisting of 13 interviews with app practitioners and four focus groups with 20 Bangladeshi female farmers. The accumulated results from the interviews and focus groups identified 22 values of Bangladeshi female farmers, which the participants expect to be reflected in the agriculture apps. Among these 22 values, 15 values (e.g., accuracy, independence) are already reflected and 7 values (e.g., accessibility, pleasure) are ignored/violated in the existing agriculture apps. We also identified 14 strategies (e.g., "applying human-centered approaches to elicit values", "establishing a dedicated team/person for values concerns") to address Bangladeshi female farmers' values in agriculture apps., Comment: 18 pages, 6 figures, Manuscript submitted to IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2021)

The elicitation of end-users' human values - such as freedom, honesty, transparency, etc. - is important in the development of software systems. We carried out two preliminary Q-studies to understand (a) the general human value opinion types of eHealth applications (apps) end-users (b) the eHealth domain human value opinion types of eHealth apps end-users (c) whether there are differences between the general and eHealth domain opinion types. Our early results show three value opinion types using generic value instruments: (1) fun-loving, success-driven and independent end-user, (2) security-conscious, socially-concerned, and success-driven end-user, and (3) benevolent, success-driven, and conformist end-user Our results also show two value opinion types using domain-specific value instruments: (1) security-conscious, reputable, and honest end-user, and (2) success-driven, reputable and pain-avoiding end-user. Given these results, consideration should be given to domain context in the design and application of values elicitation instruments., Comment: Preprint accepted to appear in 28th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC 2021). 5 Pages

Computational Thinking (CT) has been investigated from different perspectives. This research aims to investigate how secondary school girls perceive CT practices -- the problem-solving practices that students apply while they are engaged in programming -- when using the micro:bit device in a collaborative setting. This study also explores the collaborative programming process of secondary school girls with the micro:bit device. We conducted mixed-methods research with 203 secondary school girls (in the state of Victoria, Australia) and 31 mentors attending a girls-only CT program (OzGirlsCT program). The girls were grouped into 52 teams and collaboratively developed computational solutions around realistic, important problems to them and their communities. We distributed two surveys (with 193 responses each) to the girls. Further, we surveyed the mentors (with 31 responses) who monitored the girls, and collected their observation reports on their teams. Our study indicates that the girls found "debugging" the most difficult type of CT practice to apply, while collaborative practices of CT were the easiest. We found that prior coding experience significantly reduced the difficulty level of only one CT practice - "debugging". Our study also identified six challenges the girls faced and six best practices they adopted when working on their computational solutions., Comment: Preprint accepted for publication in Journal of Systems and Software, Elsevier, 2021. 33 Pages, 8 Tables, 11 Figures

Human values (e.g., pleasure, privacy, and social justice) are what a person or a society considers important. The inability to address them in software-intensive systems can result in numerous undesired consequences (e.g., financial losses) for individuals and communities. Various solutions (e.g., methodologies, techniques) are developed to help "operationalize values in software". The ultimate goal is to ensure building software (better) reflects and respects human values. In this survey, "operationalizing values" is referred to as the process of identifying human values and translating them to accessible and concrete concepts so that they can be implemented, validated, verified, and measured in software. This paper provides a deep understanding of the research landscape on operationalizing values in software engineering, covering 51 primary studies. It also presents an analysis and taxonomy of 51 solutions for operationalizing values in software engineering. Our survey reveals that most solutions attempt to help operationalize values in the early phases (requirements and design) of the software development life cycle. However, the later phases (implementation and testing) and other aspects of software development (e.g., "team organization") still need adequate consideration. We outline implications for research and practice and identify open issues and future research directions to advance this area., Comment: Accepted for publication in IEEE Access Journal, IEEE - 27 Pages - 14 Tables, 7 Figures

Background: There is a growing awareness of the importance of human values (e.g., inclusiveness, privacy) in software systems. However, there are no practical tools to support the integration of human values during software development. We argue that a tool that can identify human values from software development artefacts and present them to varying software development roles can (partially) address this gap. We refer to such a tool as human values dashboard. Further to this, our understanding of such a tool is limited. Aims: This study aims to (1) investigate the possibility of using a human values dashboard to help address human values during software development, (2) identify possible benefits of using a human values dashboard, and (3) elicit practitioners' needs from a human values dashboard. Method: We conducted an exploratory study by interviewing 15 software practitioners. A dashboard prototype was developed to support the interview process. We applied thematic analysis to analyse the collected data. Results: Our study finds that a human values dashboard would be useful for the development team (e.g., project manager, developer, tester). Our participants acknowledge that development artefacts, especially requirements documents and issue discussions, are the most suitable source for identifying values for the dashboard. Our study also yields a set of high-level user requirements for a human values dashboard (e.g., it shall allow determining values priority of a project). Conclusions: Our study suggests that a values dashboard is potentially used to raise awareness of values and support values-based decision-making in software development. Future work will focus on addressing the requirements and using issue discussions as potential artefacts for the dashboard., Comment: 12 Pages. Accepted to appear in 15th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). Preprint

In the last few years, AI continues demonstrating its positive impact on society while sometimes with ethically questionable consequences. Building and maintaining public trust in AI has been identified as the key to successful and sustainable innovation. This chapter discusses the challenges related to operationalizing ethical AI principles and presents an integrated view that covers high-level ethical AI principles, the general notion of trust/trustworthiness, and product/process support in the context of responsible AI, which helps improve both trust and trustworthiness of AI for a wider set of stakeholders.

Agile methods are predominantly focused on delivering business values. But can Agile methods be adapted to effectively address and deliver human values such as social justice, privacy, and sustainability in the software they produce? Human values are what an individual or a society considers important in life. Ignoring these human values in software can pose difficulties or risks for all stakeholders (e.g., user dissatisfaction, reputation damage, financial loss). To answer this question, we selected the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), one of the most commonly used Agile methods in the industry, and conducted a qualitative case study to identify possible intervention points within SAFe that are the most natural to address and integrate human values in software. We present five high-level empirically-justified sets of interventions in SAFe: artefacts, roles, ceremonies, practices, and culture. We elaborate how some current Agile artefacts (e.g., user story), roles (e.g., product owner), ceremonies (e.g., stand-up meeting), and practices (e.g., business-facing testing) in SAFe can be modified to support the inclusion of human values in software. Further, our study suggests new and exclusive values-based artefacts (e.g., legislative requirement), ceremonies (e.g., values conversation), roles (e.g., values champion), and cultural practices (e.g., induction and hiring) to be introduced in SAFe for this purpose. Guided by our findings, we argue that existing Agile methods can account for human values in software delivery with some evolutionary adaptations., Comment: Preprint - Accepted to be published in IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering (2021), 18 Pages, 5 Figures, 3 Tables

Ubiquitous technologies such as mobile software applications (mobile apps) have a tremendous influence on the evolution of the social, cultural, economic, and political facets of life in society. Mobile apps fulfil many practical purposes for users including entertainment, transportation, financial management, etc. Given the ubiquity of mobile apps in the lives of individuals and the consequent effect of these technologies on society, it is essential to consider the relationship between human values and the development and deployment of mobile apps. The many negative consequences of violating human values such as privacy, fairness or social justice by technology have been documented in recent times. If we can detect these violations in a timely manner, developers can look to better address them. To understand the violation of human values in a range of common mobile apps, we analysed 22,119 app reviews from Google Play Store using natural language processing techniques. We base our values violation detection approach on a widely accepted model of human values; the Schwartz theory of basic human values. The results of our analysis show that 26.5% of the reviews contained text indicating user perceived violations of human values. We found that benevolence and self-direction were the most violated value categories, and conformity and tradition were the least violated categories. Our results also highlight the need for a proactive approach to the alignment of values amongst stakeholders and the use of app reviews as a valuable additional source for mining values requirements., Comment: 10 pages, Accepted for publication in IEEE/ACM 43nd International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Society (ICSE-SEIS), IEEE, 2021

Despite dedicated effort and research in the last two decades, the entrepreneurship field is still limited by little evidence-based knowledge of the impacts of entrepreneurship programs on the entrepreneurial intention of students in pre-university levels of study. Further, gender equity continues to be an issue in the entrepreneurial sector, particularly in STEM-focused entrepreneurship. In this context, this study was designed to explore the effects of a one-day female-focused STEM-based entrepreneurship program (for brevity, we call it the OzGirlsEntrepreneurship program) on the entrepreneurial intention of secondary school female students. The study collected data from two surveys completed by 193 secondary school female students, aged 14-16 years, who participated in the OzGirlsEntrepreneurship program. This program encouraged girls to develop and implement creative computational solutions to socially relevant problems, with an Internet of Things (IoT) component using the micro:bit device. The findings reveal that a key factor in the development of entrepreneurial attitudes in young female students is associated with soft-skills development, particularly in the areas of creative thinking, risk-taking, problem-solving, and leadership development. The importance of meaningful human connections, including positive role modelling and peer to peer learning were also important factors in fostering entrepreneurial intent. With these factors in mind, our findings highlight that the OzGirlsEntrepreneurship program substantially increased the entrepreneurial intention of secondary school female students. In addition, this study offers actionable implications and recommendations to develop and deliver entrepreneurship education programs for secondary school level students., Comment: 20 Pages, Accepted to appear in International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal (IEMJ), Springer, 2020

The ubiquity of mobile applications (apps) in daily life raises the imperative that the apps should reflect users' values. However, users' values are not usually taken into account in app development. Thus there is significant potential for user dissatisfaction and negative socio-economic consequences. To be cognizant of values in apps, the first step is to find out what those values are, and that was the objective of this study conducted in Bangladesh. Our focus was on rural women, specifically female farmers. The basis for our study was Schwartz's universal human values theory, and we used an associated survey instrument, the Portrait Values Questionnaire (PVQ). Our survey of 193 Bangladeshi female farmers showed that Conformity and Security were regarded as the most important values, while Power, Hedonism, and Stimulation were the least important. This finding would be helpful for developers to take into account when developing agriculture apps for this market. In addition, the methodology we used provides a model to follow to elicit the values of apps' users in other communities., Comment: 10 Pages, Accepted to appear in 54th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2021

Failure to account for human values in software (e.g., equality and fairness) can result in user dissatisfaction and negative socio-economic impact. Engineering these values in software, however, requires technical and methodological support throughout the development life cycle. This paper investigates to what extent software engineering (SE) research has considered human values. We investigate the prevalence of human values in recent (2015 - 2018) publications at some of the top-tier SE conferences and journals. We classify SE publications, based on their relevance to different values, against a widely used value structure adopted from social sciences. Our results show that: (a) only a small proportion of the publications directly consider values, classified as relevant publications; (b) for the majority of the values, very few or no relevant publications were found; and (c) the prevalence of the relevant publications was higher in SE conferences compared to SE journals. This paper shares these and other insights that motivate research on human values in software engineering.