Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Opportunities and Risks for Citizen Science in the Age of Artificial Intelligence Cover

Opportunities and Risks for Citizen Science in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Citizen Science: Theory and Practice
Volume 4 (2019): Issue 1
By: Luigi Ceccaroni,  James Bibby,  Erin Roger,  Paul Flemons,  Katina Michael,  Laura Fagan and  Jessica L. Oliver  
Open Access
|Nov 2019

References

  1. 1Australian Citizen Science Association. n.d. Who are we? What is citizen science? Available at https://citizenscience.org.au/who-we-are/ [Last accessed 28 September 2019].
    Back to article
  2. 2Barrat, J. 2013. Our final invention: Artificial intelligence and the end of the human era. St. Martin’s Press.
    Back to article
  3. 3Bonnet, P, Joly, A, Goëau, H, Champ, J, Vignau, C, Molino JF, Barthélémy, D and Boujemaa, N. 2016. Plant identification: man vs. machine. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 75(3): 1647. DOI: 10.1007/s11042-015-2607-4
    Back to article
  4. 4Bowser, A, Wiggins, A, Shanley, L, Preece, J and Henderson, S. 2014. Sharing data while protecting privacy in citizen science. Interactions, 21(1): 70. DOI: 10.1145/2540032
    Back to article
  5. 5Brownlow, J, Zaki, M, Neely, A and Urmetzer, F. 2015. Data and analytics-data-driven business models: A blueprint for innovation. University of Cambridge: Cambridge Service Alliance. Available at https://cambridgeservicealliance.eng.cam.ac.uk/resources/Downloads/Monthly%20Papers/2015FebruaryPaperTheDDBMInnovationBlueprint.pdf [Last accessed 28 September 2019].
    Back to article
  6. 6Buolamwini, J and Gebru, T. 2018. Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency: Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 81: 77. Available at http://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a.html?mod=article_inline [Last accessed 28 September 2019].
    Back to article
  7. 7Campbell, J and Jensen, DE. 2019. The Promise and Peril of a Digital Ecosystem for the Planet: Key Decisions Are Needed in the Next 12 Months to Set in Motion a Robust Architecture and Governance Framework. Available at https://medium.com/@davidedjensen_99356/building-a-digital-ecosystem-for-the-planet-557c41225dc2 [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  8. 8Carranza-Rojas, J, Goëau, H, Bonnet, P, Mata-Montero, E and Joly, A. 2017. Going deeper in the automated identification of Herbarium specimens. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 17(1): 181. DOI: 10.1186/s12862-017-1014-z
    Back to article
  9. 9Ceccaroni, L, Bowser, A and Brenton, P. 2017. Civic education and citizen science: Definitions, categories, knowledge representation. In Analyzing the Role of Citizen Science in Modern Research, 1–23. Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-0962-2
    Back to article
  10. 10Ceccaroni, L, Velickovski, F, Blaas, M, Wernand, MR, Blauw, A and Subirats, L. 2018. Artificial Intelligence and Earth Observation to Explore Water Quality in the Wadden Sea. In: Mathieu, PP and Aubrecht, C (eds.), Earth Observation Open Science and Innovation. ISSI Scientific Report Series, 15, 311–320. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-65633-5_18
    Back to article
  11. 11Chui, M, Manyika, J, Miremadi, M, Henke, N, Chung, R, Nel, P and Malhotra, S. 2018. Notes from the AI frontier: Insights from hundreds of use cases: Discussion Paper. McKinsey Global Institute. Available at https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/artificial-intelligence/notes-from-the-ai-frontier-applications-and-value-of-deep-learning [Last accessed 28 September 2019].
    Back to article
  12. 12Cowls, J and Floridi, L. 2018. Prolegomena to a White Paper on an Ethical Framework for a Good AI Society. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3198732. DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3198732
    Back to article
  13. 13Dawson, D, Schleiger, E, Horton, J, McLaughlin, J, Robinson, C, Quezada, G, Scowcroft, J and Hajkowicz, S. 2019. Artificial Intelligence: Australia’s Ethics Framework. Australia: Data61 CSIRO. Available at https://consult.industry.gov.au/strategic-policy/artificial-intelligence-ethics-framework/ [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  14. 14Deng, DP, Chuang, TR, Shao, KT, Mai, GS, Lin, TE, Lemmens, R, Hsu, CH, Lin, HH and Kraak, MJ. 2012. Using social media for collaborative species identification and occurrence: issues, methods, and tools. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Crowdsourced and Volunteered Geographic Information, 22–29. Association for Computing Machinery. DOI: 10.1145/2442952.2442957
    Back to article
  15. 15Dennett, DC. 2017. From bacteria to Bach and back: The evolution of minds. Great Britain.
    Back to article
  16. 16Ellwood, ER, Dunckel, BA, Flemons, P, Guralnick, R, Nelson, G, Newman, G, Newman, S, Paul, D, Riccardi, G, Rios, N and Seltmann, KC. 2015. Accelerating the digitization of biodiversity research specimens through online public participation. BioScience, 65(4): 383–96. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biv005
    Back to article
  17. 17European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. 2018. Statement on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and ‘Autonomous’ Systems. European Commission, European Union. DOI: 10.2777/531856
    Back to article
  18. 18Feffer, M, Rudovic, O and Picard, RW. 2018. A Mixture of Personalized Experts for Human Affect Estimation. In: Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition, Perner, P. (ed.). MLDM 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 10935. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-96133-0_24
    Back to article
  19. 19GDPR. 2016. General Data Protection Regulation. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC.
    Back to article
  20. 20Grant, MJ and Booth, A. 2009. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2): 91–108. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
    Back to article
  21. 21Hartmann, PM, Zaki, M, Feldmann, N and Neely, A. 2014. Big data for big business? A taxonomy of data-driven business models used by start-up firms. Cambridge: Cambridge Service Alliance, University of Cambridge. Available at https://cambridgeservicealliance.eng.cam.ac.uk/resources/Downloads/Monthly%20Papers/2014_March_DataDrivenBusinessModels.pdf [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  22. 22Hecht, J. 2018. Managing expectations of artificial intelligence. Nature, 563: S141–S143. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-018-07504-9
    Back to article
  23. 23Henke, N, Bughin, J, Chui, M, Manyika, J, Saleh, T, Wiseman, B and Sethupathy, G. 2016. The age of analytics: Competing in a data-driven world. McKinsey Global Institute. Available at https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/mckinsey-analytics/our-insights/the-age-of-analytics-competing-in-a-data-driven-world [Last accessed 29 September 2019]
    Back to article
  24. 24Herzig, A, Lorini, E and Pearce, D. 2017. Social Intelligence. AI & Soc. London: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-017-0782-8
    Back to article
  25. 25Himel, S and Seamans, R. 2017. Artificial Intelligence, Incentives to Innovate, and Competition Policy. Competition Policy International Antitrust Chronicle. Available at https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/artificial-intelligence-incentives-to-innovate-and-competition-policy [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  26. 26House of Lords Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence. 2018. AI in the UK: ready, willing and able? Authority of the House of Lords. Available at https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ldai/100/100.pdf [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  27. 27IEEE. 2018. Ethically Aligned Design: A Vision for Prioritizing Human Well-being with Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems. Version 2 – For Public Discussion. Available at https://standards.ieee.org/content/dam/ieee-standards/standards/web/documents/other/ead_v2.pdf [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  28. 28Jaques, N, Kim, YL and Picard, R. 2016. Personality, Attitudes, and Bonding in Conversations. In: Traum, D, Swartout, W, Khooshabeh, P, Kopp, S, Scherer, S and Leuski, A (eds.), International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, 378–382. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-47665-0_37
    Back to article
  29. 29Joppa, LN. 2017. The case for technology investments in the environment. Nature, 552(7685): 325–328. DOI: 10.1038/d41586-017-08675-7
    Back to article
  30. 30Joshi, S, Randall, N, Chiplunkar, S, Wattimena, T and Stavrianakis, K. 2018. ‘We’-A Robotic System to Extend Social Impact of Community Garden. In Proceeding HRI ‘18 Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 349–350. Association for Computing Machinery. DOI: 10.1145/3173386.3177817
    Back to article
  31. 31Kaplan, A and Haenlein, M. 2019. Siri, Siri, in my hand: Who’s the fairest in the land? On the interpretations, illustrations, and implications of artificial intelligence. Business Horizons, 62(1): 15–25. DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2018.08.004
    Back to article
  32. 32Kido, T and Swan, M. 2015. Ambient Intelligence and Crowdsourced Genetics for Understanding Loss Aversion in Decision Making. 2015 Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Spring Symposium Series. Ambient Intelligence for Health and Cognitive Enhancement. Available at https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/SSS/SSS15/paper/viewPaper/10338 [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  33. 33Korot, E, Wood, E, Weiner, A, Sim, DA and Trese, M. 2019. A renaissance of teleophthalmology through artificial intelligence. Eye, 33: 861–863. DOI: 10.1038/s41433-018-0324-8
    Back to article
  34. 34Krombholz, K, Merkl, D and Weippl, E. 2012. Fake identities in social media: A case study on the sustainability of the Facebook business model. Journal of Service Science Research, 4(2): 175–212. DOI: 10.1007/s12927-012-0008-z
    Back to article
  35. 35Kumar, N, Belhumeur, PN, Biswas, A, Jacobs, DW, Kress, WJ, Lopez, IC and Soares, JV. 2012. Leafsnap: A computer vision system for automatic plant species identification. In: Fitzgibbon, A, Lazebnik, S, Perona, P, Sato, Y and Schmid, C (eds.), European Conference on Computer Vision, 502–516. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-33709-3_36
    Back to article
  36. 36Lahoz-Monfort, J, Chadès, I, Davies, A, Fegraus, E, Game, E, Guillera-Arroita, G, Harcourt, R, Indraswari, K, McGowan, J, Oliver, JL, Refisch, J, Rhodes, J, Roe, P, Rogers, A, Ward, A, Watson, D, Watson, J, Wintle, B and Joppa, L. 2019. A Call for International Leadership and Coordination to Realize the Potential of Conservation Technology. BioScience. 69(10): 823–832. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biz090
    Back to article
  37. 37Le, QV, Monga, R, Devin, M, Chen, K, Corrado, GS, Dean, J and Ng, AY. 2013. Building high-level features using large scale unsupervised learning. In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, 8595–8598. Vancouver, BC, Canada: IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/ICASSP.2013.6639343
    Back to article
  38. 38Leavy, S. 2018. Gender bias in Artificial Intelligence: The Need for Diversity and Gender Theory in Machine Learning. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Gender Equality in Software Engineering, 14–16. DOI: 10.1145/3195570.3195580
    Back to article
  39. 39Mac Aodha, O, Gibb, R, Barlow, KE, Browning, E, Firman, M, Freeman, R, Harder, B, Kinsey, L, Mead, GR, Newson, SE, Pandourski, I, Parsons, S, Russ, J, Szodoray-Paradi, A, Szodoray-Paradi, F, Tilova, E, Girolami, M, Brostow, G and Jones, KE. 2018. Bat Detective—Deep Learning Tools for Bat Acoustic Signal Detection. PLOS Computational Biology, 14(3): e1005995. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005995
    Back to article
  40. 40MacDonald, EA, Case, NA, Clayton, JH, Hall, MK, Heavner, M, Lalone, N, Patel, KG and Tapia, A. 2015. Aurorasaurus: A citizen science platform for viewing and reporting the aurora. Space Weather, 13(9): 548–559. DOI: 10.1002/2015SW001214
    Back to article
  41. 41Mayer-Schönberger, V and Cukier, K. 2013. Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
    Back to article
  42. 42McKinstry, C. 2009. Mind as Space. In: Epstein, R, Roberts, G and Beber, G (eds.), Parsing the Turing Test: Philosophical and Methodological Issues in the Quest for the Thinking Computer, 283–299. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6710-5
    Back to article
  43. 43Miller, T. 2019. Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences. Artificial Intelligence, 267: 1–38. DOI: 10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007
    Back to article
  44. 44Mims, C. 2018. Tech’s Titans Tiptoe Toward Monopoly: Amazon, Facebook and Google may be repeating the history of steel, utility, rail and telegraph empires past—while Apple appears vulnerable. Wall Street Journal. Available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/techs-titans-tiptoe-toward-monopoly-1527783845 [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  45. 45Müller, VC (ed.). 2016. Risks of artificial intelligence. CRC Press. DOI: 10.1201/b19187
    Back to article
  46. 46Müller, VC and Bostrom, N. 2016. Future progress in artificial intelligence: A survey of expert opinion. In: Fundamental issues of artificial intelligence, 555–572. Cham: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-26485-1_33
    Back to article
  47. 47Parham, J, Stewart, C, Crall, J, Rubenstein, D, Holmberg, J and Berger-Wolf, T. 2018. An Animal Detection Pipeline for Identification. In: 2018 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), 1075–1083. IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/WACV.2018.00123
    Back to article
  48. 48Pedemonte, E. 2016. Google, Facebook, the New Monopolies and Silicon Valley Ideologues. DigitCult – Scientific Journal on Digital Cultures, 1(2): 27–34. DOI: 10.4399/97888548960933
    Back to article
  49. 49Picard, RW. 1995. Affective Computing. M.I.T Media Laboratory Perceptual Computing Section Technical Report No. 321.
    Back to article
  50. 50Pichai, S. 2018. AI at Google: our principles, 7 June 2018. The Keyword. Available at https://www.blog.google/technology/ai/ai-principles/ [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  51. 51Poole, D, Mackworth, A and Goebel, R. 1998. Computational intelligence: A logical approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Back to article
  52. 52Ramamoorthy, A and Yampolskiy, R. 2018. Beyond mad? the race for artificial general intelligence. ITU Journal: ICT Discoveries, Special Issue No. 1, 2 Feb. 2018.
    Back to article
  53. 53Roger, E, Tegart, P, Dowsett, R, Kinsela, MA, Harley, MD and Ortac, G. 2019. Maximising the potential of citizen science in New South Wales. Australian Zoologist. DOI: 10.7882/AZ.2019.023
    Back to article
  54. 54Rogers, MA and Aikawa, E. 2019. Cardiovascular calcification: Artificial intelligence and big data accelerate mechanistic discovery. Nature Reviews Cardiology, 16(5): 261–274. DOI: 10.1038/s41569-018-0123-8
    Back to article
  55. 55Russakovsky, O, Deng, J, Su, H, Krause, J, Satheesh, S, Ma, S, Huang, Z, Karpathy, A, Khosla, A, Bernstein, M, Berg, AC and Fei-Fei, L. 2015. ImageNet large scale visual recognition challenge. International Journal of Computer Vision, 115(3): 211–252. DOI: 10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y
    Back to article
  56. 56Russell, KN, Do, MT, Huff, JC and Platnick, NI. 2007. Introducing SPIDA-web: Wavelets, neural networks and Internet accessibility in an image-based automated identification system. In: Automated Taxon Identification in Systematics: Theory, Approaches and Applications, 131–149. DOI: 10.1201/9781420008074
    Back to article
  57. 57Russell, SJ and Norvig, P. 2016. Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. USA: Pearson Education Limited.
    Back to article
  58. 58Scherer, MU. 2016. Regulating artificial intelligence systems: Risks, challenges, competencies, and strategies. Harvard Journal of Law Technology, 29(2): 353–400. Available at https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/hjlt29&i=365 [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  59. 59Schüritz, R, Seebacher, S and Dorner, R. 2017. Capturing value from data: Revenue models for data-driven services. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. DOI: 10.24251/HICSS.2017.648
    Back to article
  60. 60See, L, Carlson, T, Haklay, M, Oliver, JL, Fraisl, D, Mondardini, R, Brocklehurst, M, Shanley, L, Schade, S, Wehn, U, Abrate, T, Anstee, J, Arnold, S, Billot, M, Campbell, J, Espey, J, Gold, M, Hager, G, He, S, Hepburn, L, Hsu, A, Long, D, Maso, J, McCallum, I, Muniafu, M, Moorthy, I, Obersteiner, M, Parker, A, Weisspflug, M and West, S. 2019. Citizen Science and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability. (in press).
    Back to article
  61. 61Shaw, G. 2019. The Future Computed: Artificial Intelligence and its Role in Society. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation. Available at https://news.microsoft.com/futurecomputed/ [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  62. 62Shoham, Y, Perrault, R, Brynjolfsson, E, Clark, J, Manyika, J, Niebles, JC, Lyons, T, Etchemendy, J, Grosz, B and Bauer, Z. 2018. The AI Index 2018 Annual Report. Stanford, CA, US: AI Index Steering Committee, Human-Centered AI Initiative, Stanford University. Available at http://cdn.aiindex.org/2018/AI%20Index%202018%20Annual%20Report.pdf [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  63. 63Singh, P, Lin, T, Mueller, ET, Lim, G, Perkins, T and Li Zhu, W. 2002. Open Mind Common Sense: Knowledge Acquisition from the General Public. In: Meersman, R and Tari Z (eds.), On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, DOA, and ODBASE. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2519. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/3-540-36124-3_77
    Back to article
  64. 64Sivinski, G, Okuliar, A and Kjolbye, L. 2017. Is big data a big deal? A competition law approach to big data. European Competition Journal, 13(2–3): 199–227. DOI: 10.1080/17441056.2017.1362866
    Back to article
  65. 65Sterne, J. 2017. Artificial intelligence for marketing: Practical applications. Hoboken, New Jersey, US: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. DOI: 10.1002/9781119406341
    Back to article
  66. 66Storksdieck, M, Shirk, JL, Cappadonna, JL, Domroese, M, Göbel, C, Haklay, M, Miller-Rushing, AJ, Roetman, P, Sbrocchi, C and Vohland, K. 2016. Associations for citizen science: Regional knowledge, global collaboration. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 1(2). DOI: 10.5334/cstp.55
    Back to article
  67. 67Stucke, ME and Grunes, AP. 2016. Introduction: Big Data and Competition Policy. Big Data and Competition Policy. Oxford University Press. Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2849074 [Last accessed 29 September 2019].
    Back to article
  68. 68Sullivan, BL, Aycrigg, JL, Barry, JH, Bonney, RE, Bruns, N, Cooper, CB, Damoulas, T, Dhondt, AA, Dietterich, T, Farnsworth, A, Fink, D, Fitzpatrick, JW, Fredericks, T, Gerbracht, J, Gomes, C, Hochachka, WM, Iliff, MJ, Lagoze, C, La Sorte, FA, Merrifield, M, Morris, W, Phillips, TB, Reynolds, M, Rodewald, AD, Rosenberg, KV, Trautmann, NM, Wiggins, A, Winkler, DW, Wong, WK, Wood, CL, Yu, J and Kelling, S. 2014. The eBird Enterprise: An Integrated Approach to Development and Application of Citizen Science. Biological Conservation, 169: 31–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.11.003
    Back to article
  69. 69Sullivan, DP, Winsnes, CF, Åkesson, I, Hjelmare, M, Wiking, M, Schutten, R, Campbell, L, Leifsson, H, Rhodes, S, Nordgren, A, Smith, K, Revaz, B, Finnbogason, B, Szantner, A and Lundberg, E. 2018. Deep Learning Is Combined with Massive-Scale Citizen Science to Improve Large-Scale Image Classification. Nature Biotechnology, 36: 820–828. DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4225
    Back to article
  70. 70Sun, Y, Liu, Y, Wang, G and Zhang, H. 2017. Deep learning for plant identification in natural environment. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience. 2017. DOI: 10.1155/2017/7361042
    Back to article
  71. 71Teece, DJ. 2018. Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1): 40–49. DOI: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
    Back to article
  72. 72The Future of Life Institute. 2017. Asilomar AI principles [Principles developed in conjunction with the 2017 Asilomar conference]. Available at https://futureoflife.org/ai-principles/ [Last accessed 28 September 2019].
    Back to article
  73. 73Tollefson, J. 2016. Computers on the reef: Software tools that digitize and annotate underwater images are transforming marine ecology. Nature, 537: 123–124. DOI: 10.1038/537123a
    Back to article
  74. 74Universite de Montreal. 2018. Montreal Declaration for a Responsible Development of Artificial Intelligence 2018. Available at https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/ebc3a3_c5c1c196fc164756afb92466c081d7ae.pdf [Last accessed 1 October 2019].
    Back to article
  75. 75Van Horn, G, Mac Aodha, O, Song, Y, Cui, Y, Sun, C, Shepard, A, Adam, H, Perona, P and Belongie, S. 2018. The iNaturalist Species Classification and Detection Dataset. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 8769–8778. DOI: 10.1109/CVPR.2018.00914
    Back to article
  76. 76Wäldchen, J, Rzanny, M, Seeland, M and Mäder, P. 2018. Automated plant species identification—Trends and future directions. PLoS Computational Biology, 14(4): e1005993. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005993
    Back to article
  77. 77Webb, A. 2019. The Big Nine: How the Tech Titans and Their Thinking Machines Could Warp Humanity. Hachette, UK.
    Back to article
  78. 78Wehn, U, Williams, C and Ceccaroni, L. 2019. D6.1: Ethics H – Requirement No. 1. Deliverable report of project H2020 MICS (grant agreement No 824711).
    Back to article
  79. 79Weinstein, BG. 2018. A computer vision for animal ecology. Journal of Animal Ecology, 87(3): 533–545. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.12780
    Back to article
  80. 80Wilkinson, MD, Dumontier, M, Aalbersberg, IJ, Appleton, G, Axton, M, Baak, A, Bouwman, J, et al. 2016. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific data, 3. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18
    Back to article
  81. 81Williams, C, Wehn, U and Ceccaroni, L. 2019. D6.2: Ethics POPD – Requirement No. 2. Deliverable report of project H2020 MICS (grant agreement No 824711).
    Back to article
  82. 82Winfield, AF, Michael, K, Pitt, J and Evers, V. 2019. Machine ethics: the design and governance of ethical AI and autonomous systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(3): 509–517. DOI: 10.1109/JPROC.2019.2900622
    Back to article
  83. 83Yampolskiy, R and Fox, J. 2013. Safety engineering for artificial general intelligence. Topoi, 32(2): 217–226. DOI: 10.1007/s11245-012-9128-9
    Back to article
  84. 84Yudkowsky, E. 2008. Artificial intelligence as a positive and negative factor in global risk. In: Rees, M, Bostrom, N and Ćirković, M (eds.), Global Catastrophic Risks, 308–345. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.241 | Journal eISSN: 2057-4991
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Mar 9, 2019
Accepted on: Oct 30, 2019
Published on: Nov 28, 2019
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2019 Luigi Ceccaroni, James Bibby, Erin Roger, Paul Flemons, Katina Michael, Laura Fagan, Jessica L. Oliver, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 4 (2019): Issue 1Next article