skip to main content
research-article

Speculating on Risks of AI Clones to Selfhood and Relationships: Doppelganger-phobia, Identity Fragmentation, and Living Memories

Published: 16 April 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Digitally replicating the appearance and behaviour of individuals is becoming feasible with recent advancements in deep-learning technologies such as interactive deepfake applications, voice conversion, and virtual actors. Interactive applications of such agents, termed AI clones, pose risks related to impression management, identity abuse, and unhealthy dependencies. Identifying concerns AI clones will generate is a prerequisite to establishing the basis of discourse around how this technology will impact a source individual's selfhood and interpersonal relationships. We presented 20 participants of diverse ages and backgrounds with 8 speculative scenarios to explore their perception towards the concept of AI clones. We found that (1. doppelganger-phobia) the abusive potential of AI clones to exploit and displace the identity of an individual elicits negative emotional reactions; (2. identity fragmentation) creating replicas of a living individual threatens their cohesive self-perception and unique individuality; and (3. living memories) interacting with a clone of someone with whom the user has an existing relationship poses risks of misrepresenting the individual or developing over-attachment to the clone. These findings provide an avenue to discuss preliminary ethical implications, respect for identity and authenticity, and design recommendations for creating AI clones.

Supplementary Material

ZIP File (v7cscw091aux.zip)
The following supplementary materials are included with the paper "Speculating on Risks of AI Clones to Selfhood and Relationships: Doppelganger-phobia, Identity Fragmentation, and Living Memories". 1) A complete copy of the speculative scenarios, including both the text prompt and visual stimuli presented to participants during the study, as described in Section 3.1 of the paper. This is a PDF file that may be viewed with any suitable PDF viewing software. 2) A complete copy of the interview script used by researchers during semi-structured interviews with participants, as described in Section 3.1 of the paper. This is a PDF file that may be viewed with any suitable PDF viewing software. There should be no other contents in the supplementary materials, barring this README. Please contact the lead researcher at [email protected] if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns.

References

[1]
2022. Internet crime complaint center (IC3): Deepfakes and stolen PII utilized to apply for remote work positions. https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA220628
[2]
Jascha Achenbach, Thomas Waltemate, Marc Erich Latoschik, and Mario Botsch. 2017. Fast generation of realistic virtual humans. In Proceedings of the 23rd acm symposium on virtual reality software and technology. 1--10.
[3]
Henry Ajder, Giorgio Patrini, Francesco Cavalli, and Laurence Cullen. 2019. The State of Deepfakes: Landscape, Threats, and Impact. Retrieved September 3, 2021 from https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/10/08/deepfake_report.pdf
[4]
Susan M Andersen and Alana Baum. 1994. Transference in interpersonal relations: Inferences and affect based on significant-other representations. Journal of personality 62, 4 (1994), 459--497.
[5]
Laura Aymerich-Franch and J Bailenson. 2014. The use of doppelgangers in virtual reality to treat public speaking anxiety: a gender comparison. In Proceedings of the International Society for Presence Research Annual Conference. Citeseer, 173--186.
[6]
Norman I Badler, Nadia Magenat-Thalmann, Laurie McCulloch, Evan Marc Hirsch, and Phil LoPiccolo. 2002. Digital humans: what roles will they play?. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2002 conference abstracts and applications. 88--89.
[7]
Jeremy N Bailenson and Kathryn Y Segovia. 2010. Virtual doppelgangers: Psychological effects of avatars who ignore their owners. In Online worlds: Convergence of the real and the virtual. Springer, 175--186.
[8]
Kristen Barta and Nazanin Andalibi. 2021. Constructing Authenticity on TikTok: Social Norms and Social Support on the "Fun" Platform. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW2, Article 430 (oct 2021), 29 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479574
[9]
Joseph J Beard. 2001. Clones, bones and twilight zones: protecting the digital persona of the quick, the dead and the imaginary. J. Copyright Soc'y USA 49 (2001), 441--548.
[10]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77--101.
[11]
Pam Briggs and Lisa Thomas. 2015. An inclusive, value sensitive design perspective on future identity technologies. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 22, 5 (2015), 1--28.
[12]
Sam W.T. Chan, Tamil Selvan Gunasekaran, Yun Suen Pai, Haimo Zhang, and Suranga Nanayakkara. 2021. KinVoices: Using Voices of Friends and Family in Voice Interfaces. pre-print (2021).
[13]
Janet X Chen, Francesco Vitale, and Joanna McGrenere. 2021. What Happens After Death? Using a Design Workbook to Understand User Expectations for Preparing their Data. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--13.
[14]
EunJeong Cheon and Norman Makoto Su. 2018. Futuristic autobiographies: Weaving participant narratives to elicit values around robots. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. 388--397.
[15]
John Danaher and Neil McArthur. 2017. Robot sex: Social and ethical implications. MIT Press.
[16]
Maartje MA de Graaf. 2016. An ethical evaluation of human--robot relationships. International journal of social robotics 8, 4 (2016), 589--598.
[17]
Michael A DeVito, Jeremy Birnholtz, and Jeffery T Hancock. 2017. Platforms, people, and perception: Using affordances to understand self-presentation on social media. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing. 740--754.
[18]
Brianna Dym, Jed R. Brubaker, Casey Fiesler, and Bryan Semaan. 2019. "Coming Out Okay": Community Narratives for LGBTQ Identity Recovery Work. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 3, CSCW, Article 154 (nov 2019), 28 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359256
[19]
Casey Fiesler. 2019. Ethical considerations for research involving (speculative) public data. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, GROUP (2019), 1--13.
[20]
Casey Fiesler. 2021. Innovating like an optimist, preparing like a pessimist: Ethical speculation and the legal imagination. Colo. Tech. LJ 19 (2021), 1.
[21]
Luciano Floridi. 2018. Artificial intelligence, deepfakes and a future of ectypes. Philosophy & Technology 31, 3 (2018), 317--321.
[22]
Asbjørn Følstad, Marita Skjuve, and Petter Bae Brandtzaeg. 2018. Different chatbots for different purposes: towards a typology of chatbots to understand interaction design. In International Conference on Internet Science. Springer, 145--156.
[23]
Aline Shakti Franzke, Anja Bechmann, Michael Zimmer, Charles Ess, et al. 2020. Internet research: Ethical guidelines 3.0. Association of Internet Researchers 4, 1 (2020), 2056305118763366.
[24]
Guo Freeman and Divine Maloney. 2021. Body, avatar, and me: The presentation and perception of self in social virtual reality. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW3 (2021), 1--27.
[25]
Guo Freeman, Samaneh Zamanifard, Divine Maloney, and Alexandra Adkins. 2020. My body, my avatar: How people perceive their avatars in social virtual reality. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--8.
[26]
Batya Friedman, Peter H Kahn, Alan Borning, and Alina Huldtgren. 2013. Value sensitive design and information systems. In Early engagement and new technologies: Opening up the laboratory. Springer, 55--95.
[27]
Katie Z Gach and Jed R Brubaker. 2020. Experiences of trust in postmortem profile management. ACM Transactions on Social Computing 3, 1 (2020), 1--26.
[28]
Katie Z. Gach, Casey Fiesler, and Jed R. Brubaker. 2017. ?Control Your Emotions, Potter": An Analysis of Grief Policing on Facebook in Response to Celebrity Death. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 1, CSCW, Article 47 (dec 2017), 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3134682
[29]
Erving Goffman et al. 1978. The presentation of self in everyday life. Vol. 21. Harmondsworth London.
[30]
Jonathan Gratch, Jeff Rickel, Elisabeth André, Justine Cassell, Eric Petajan, and Norman Badler. 2002. Creating interactive virtual humans: Some assembly required. IEEE Intelligent systems 17, 4 (2002), 54--63.
[31]
Colin M Gray, Cristiana Santos, Nataliia Bielova, Michael Toth, and Damian Clifford. 2021. Dark patterns and the legal requirements of consent banners: An interaction criticism perspective. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--18.
[32]
Oliver L. Haimson, Anne E. Bowser, Edward F. Melcer, and Elizabeth F. Churchill. 2015. Online Inspiration and Exploration for Identity Reinvention. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (CHI '15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3809--3818. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702270
[33]
Oliver L. Haimson and Anna Lauren Hoffmann. 2016. Constructing and enforcing "authentic" identity online: Facebook, real names, and non-normative identities. First Monday 21 (6 2016). Issue 6. https://doi.org/10.5210/FM.V21I6.6791
[34]
Oliver L. Haimson, Tianxiao Liu, Ben Zefeng Zhang, and Shanley Corvite. 2021. The Online Authenticity Paradox: What Being "Authentic" on Social Media Means, and Barriers to Achieving It. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW2, Article 423 (oct 2021), 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479567
[35]
David Hankerson, Andrea R Marshall, Jennifer Booker, Houda El Mimouni, Imani Walker, and Jennifer A Rode. 2016. Does technology have race?. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 473--486.
[36]
Karen Hao. 2021. Deepfake porn is ruining women's lives. Now the law may finally ban it. Retrieved September 3, 2021 from https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/02/12/1018222/deepfake-revenge-porn-coming-ban/
[37]
Matthew Harris. 2013. The hologram of Tupac at Coachella and Saints: The value of relics for devotees. Celebrity studies 4, 2 (2013), 238--240.
[38]
Bernie Hogan. 2010. The presentation of self in the age of social media: Distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 30, 6 (2010), 377--386.
[39]
Michelle Huang. 2022. I trained an AI chatbot on my childhood journal entries - so that I could engage in real-time dialogue with my "inner child"some reflections below:. Retrieved January 23, 2023 from https://twitter.com/michellehuang42/status/1597005489413713921?lang=en
[40]
Ming-Hui Huang and Roland T Rust. 2018. Artificial intelligence in service. Journal of Service Research 21, 2 (2018), 155--172.
[41]
Dave Itzkoff. 2016. How 'Rogue One' Brought Back Familiar Faces. Retrieved September 3, 2021 from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/27/movies/how-rogue-one-brought-back-grand-moff-tarkin.html
[42]
Yevgen Ivanov. 2017. Us9959497b1 - system and method for using a digital virtual clone as an input in a simulated environment. Retrieved September 7, 2021 from https://patents.google.com/patent/US9959497B1/en
[43]
Anna Jobin, Marcello Ienca, and Effy Vayena. 2019. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence 1, 9 (2019), 389--399.
[44]
Jin-man Kim, Jong-woo Kim, and Yoon-mi Cho. 2020. Meeting You. Retrieved September 7, 2021 from https://youtu.be/uflTK8c4w0c
[45]
Violet Kim. 2020. Virtual Reality, Real Grief. Retrieved September 3, 2021 from https://slate.com/technology/2020/05/meeting-you-virtual-reality-documentary-mbc.html
[46]
Yelim Kim, Mohi Reza, Joanna McGrenere, and Dongwook Yoon. 2021. Designers Characterize Naturalness in Voice User Interfaces: Their Goals, Practices, and Challenges. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445579
[47]
Emmanuelle P Kleinlogel, Marion Curdy, João Rodrigues, Carmen Sandi, and Marianne Schmid Mast. 2021. Doppelganger-based training: Imitating our virtual self to accelerate interpersonal skills learning. PloS one 16, 2 (2021), e0245960.
[48]
Effie Le Moignan, Shaun Lawson, Duncan A Rowland, Jamie Mahoney, and Pam Briggs. 2017. Has Instagram Fundamentally Altered the'Family Snapshot'?. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 4935--4947.
[49]
Jaime Lorenzo-Trueba, Junichi Yamagishi, Tomoki Toda, Daisuke Saito, Fernando Villavicencio, Tomi Kinnunen, and Zhenhua Ling. 2018. The voice conversion challenge 2018: Promoting development of parallel and nonparallel methods. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.04262 (2018).
[50]
Octavian M Machidon, Mihai Duguleana, and Marcello Carrozzino. 2018. Virtual humans in cultural heritage ICT applications: A review. Journal of Cultural Heritage 33 (2018), 249--260.
[51]
Sophie Maddocks. 2020. ?A Deepfake Porn Plot Intended to Silence Me': exploring continuities between pornographic and ?political'deep fakes. Porn Studies 7, 4 (2020), 415--423.
[52]
Frances M Malpezzi and William M Clements. 1989. The double and the theme of selflessness in Kagemusha. Literature/Film Quarterly 17, 3 (1989), 202.
[53]
Alice E. Marwick and danah boyd. 2011. I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society 13, 1 (2011), 114--133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313
[54]
Arion McNicoll and Nick Glass. 2014. The technology Bringing Sinatra, Tupac back to life. Retrieved September 3, 2021 from https://www.cnn.com/2014/01/08/tech/innovation/optical-technology-tupac-back-to-life/index.html
[55]
Minas Michikyan, Jessica Dennis, and Kaveri Subrahmanyam. 2014. Can You Guess Who I Am? Real, Ideal, and False Self-Presentation on Facebook Among Emerging Adults. Emerging Adulthood 3, 1 (Apr 2014), 55--64. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696814532442
[56]
Milad Mirbabaie, Stefan Stieglitz, Felix Brünker, Lennart Hofeditz, Björn Ross, and Nicholas RJ Frick. 2021. Understanding collaboration with virtual assistants--the role of social identity and the extended self. Business & Information Systems Engineering 63, 1 (2021), 21--37.
[57]
Kana Misawa and Jun Rekimoto. 2015. ChameleonMask: a human-surrogate system with a telepresence face. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2015 Emerging Technologies. 1--3.
[58]
Kana Misawa and Jun Rekimoto. 2015. Wearing another's personality: A human-surrogate system with a telepresence face. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers. 125--132.
[59]
Seyed Hamidreza Mohammadi and Alexander Kain. 2017. An overview of voice conversion systems. Speech Communication 88 (2017), 65--82.
[60]
Masahiro Mori, Karl F. MacDorman, and Norri Kageki. 2012. The Uncanny Valley [From the Field]. IEEE Robotics Automation Magazine 19, 2 (2012), 98--100. https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2012.2192811
[61]
Andreea Muresan and Henning Pohl. 2019. Chats with bots: Balancing imitation and engagement. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--6.
[62]
MyHeritage. 2021. Deep Nostalgia: Animate your family photos. Retrieved September 10, 2021 from https://www.myheritage.com/deep-nostalgia
[63]
Taewoo Nam. 2019. Citizen attitudes about job replacement by robotic automation. Futures 109 (2019), 39--49.
[64]
Lisa P Nathan, Batya Friedman, Predrag Klasnja, Shaun K Kane, and Jessica K Miller. 2008. Envisioning systemic effects on persons and society throughout interactive system design. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Designing interactive systems. 1--10.
[65]
Olivia B Newton and Mel Stanfill. 2020. My NSFW video has partial occlusion: deepfakes and the technological production of non-consensual pornography. Porn Studies 7, 4 (2020), 398--414.
[66]
Neelkumar P Patel, Devangi R Parikh, Darshan A Patel, and Ronak R Patel. 2019. AI and web-based human-like interactive university chatbot (UNIBOT). In 2019 3rd International conference on Electronics, Communication and Aerospace Technology (ICECA). IEEE, 148--150.
[67]
David L Penn, James D Ivory, Abigail Judge, et al . 2010. The virtual doppelganger: Effects of a virtual reality simulator on perceptions of schizophrenia. The Journal of nervous and mental disease 198, 6 (2010), 437--443.
[68]
Holly Maxwell Pringle. 2015. Conjuring the ideal self: An investigation of self-presentation in video game avatars. Press Start 2, 1 (2015), 1--20.
[69]
Jason Rohrer. 2020. Project December. Retrieved September 3, 2021 from https://projectdecember.net/
[70]
Jennifer Rothman. 2018. The right of publicity: Privacy reimagined for New York. Cardozo Arts & Ent. LJ 36 (2018), 573--600.
[71]
Nithya Sambasivan, Amna Batool, Nova Ahmed, Tara Matthews, Kurt Thomas, Laura Sanely Gaytán-Lugo, David Nemer, Elie Bursztein, Elizabeth Churchill, and Sunny Consolvo. 2019. " They Don't Leave Us Alone Anywhere We Go" Gender and Digital Abuse in South Asia. In proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--14.
[72]
Ovul Sezer. 2022. Impression (mis)management: When what you say is not what they hear. Current Opinion in Psychology 44 (2022), 31--37.
[73]
David M Shaw. 2019. Defining Data Donation After Death: Metadata, Families, Directives, Guardians and the Route to Big Consent. The Ethics of Medical Data Donation (2019), 151--159.
[74]
Alexandra Sherlock. 2013. Larger than life: Digital resurrection and the re-enchantment of society. The Information Society 29, 3 (2013), 164--176.
[75]
Mel Slater, Solène Neyret, Tania Johnston, Guillermo Iruretagoyena, Mercè Álvarez de la Campa Crespo, Miquel Alabèrnia-Segura, Bernhard Spanlang, and Guillem Feixas. 2019. An experimental study of a virtual reality counselling paradigm using embodied self-dialogue. Scientific reports 9, 1 (2019), 1--13.
[76]
Frederic Stutzman and Woodrow Hartzog. 2012. Boundary regulation in social media. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work. 769--778.
[77]
Vivian Ta, Caroline Griffith, Carolynn Boatfield, Xinyu Wang, Maria Civitello, Haley Bader, Esther DeCero, and Alexia Loggarakis. 2020. User experiences of social support from companion chatbots in everyday contexts: Thematic analysis. Journal of medical Internet research 22, 3 (2020).
[78]
Lee Taber and Steve Whittaker. 2020. "On Finsta, I Can Say 'Hail Satan'": Being Authentic but Disagreeable on Instagram. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376182
[79]
Jon Truby and Rafael Brown. 2021. Human digital thought clones: the Holy Grail of artificial intelligence for big data. Information & Communications Technology Law 30, 2 (2021), 140--168.
[80]
Cristian Vaccari and Andrew Chadwick. 2020. Deepfakes and disinformation: Exploring the impact of synthetic political video on deception, uncertainty, and trust in news. Social Media Society 6, 1 (2020), 2056305120903408.
[81]
William D Weisman and Jorge F Peña. 2021. Face the Uncanny: The Effects of Doppelganger Talking Head Avatars on Affect-Based Trust Toward Artificial Intelligence Technology are Mediated by Uncanny Valley Perceptions. Cyberpsy- chology, Behavior, and Social Networking 24, 3 (2021), 182--187.
[82]
Mika Westerlund. 2019. The emergence of deepfake technology: A review. Technology Innovation Management Review 9, 11 (2019).
[83]
Daricia Wilkinson, Öznur Alkan, Q Vera Liao, Massimiliano Mattetti, Inge Vejsbjerg, Bart P Knijnenburg, and Elizabeth Daly. 2021. Why or why not? The effect of justification styles on chatbot recommendations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 39, 4 (2021), 1--21.
[84]
John Wojewidka. 2020. The deepfake threat to face biometrics. Biometric Technology Today 2020, 2 (2020), 5--7.
[85]
Richmond Y Wong and Vera Khovanskaya. 2018. Speculative design in HCI: from corporate imaginations to critical orientations. In New Directions in Third Wave Human-Computer Interaction: Volume 2-Methodologies. Springer, 175--202.
[86]
Richmond Y Wong, Ellen Van Wyk, and James Pierce. 2017. Real-fictional entanglements: Using science fiction and design fiction to interrogate sensing technologies. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. 567--579.
[87]
Jun Xiao, John Stasko, and Richard Catrambone. 2007. The role of choice and customization on users' interaction with embodied conversational agents: effects on perception and performance. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 1293--1302.
[88]
Lotus Zhang, Lucy Jiang, Nicole Washington, Augustina Ao Liu, Jingyao Shao, Adam Fourney, Meredith Ringel Morris, and Leah Findlater. 2021. Social Media through Voice: Synthesized Voice Qualities and Self-presentation. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (2021), 1--21.
[89]
Xuan Zhao, Niloufar Salehi, Sasha Naranjit, Sara Alwaalan, Stephen Voida, and Dan Cosley. 2013. The many faces of Facebook: Experiencing social media as performance, exhibition, and personal archive. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1--10.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Dittos: Personalized, Embodied Agents That Participate in Meetings When You Are UnavailableProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870338:CSCW2(1-28)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
  • (2024)Mapping the individual, social and biospheric impacts of Foundation ModelsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658939(776-796)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Ethics in AI through the practitioner’s view: a grounded theory literature reviewEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-024-10465-529:3Online publication date: 6-May-2024

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 7, Issue CSCW1
CSCW
April 2023
3836 pages
EISSN:2573-0142
DOI:10.1145/3593053
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 16 April 2023
Published in PACMHCI Volume 7, Issue CSCW1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. AI agents
  2. AI clones
  3. doppelganger-phobia
  4. human-AI interaction
  5. human-centered AI
  6. identify fragmentation
  7. identity
  8. impression management
  9. interpersonal relationship
  10. living memories
  11. machine learning applications
  12. risks
  13. self-hood

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)481
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)94
Reflects downloads up to 06 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Dittos: Personalized, Embodied Agents That Participate in Meetings When You Are UnavailableProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870338:CSCW2(1-28)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
  • (2024)Mapping the individual, social and biospheric impacts of Foundation ModelsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3630106.3658939(776-796)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2024
  • (2024)Ethics in AI through the practitioner’s view: a grounded theory literature reviewEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-024-10465-529:3Online publication date: 6-May-2024

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media