Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 101 references

Social Science Is Necessary for Operationalizing Socially Responsible Foundation Models

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Socially responsible foundation models require social science at every pipeline stage, this position paper argues.

desk verdict Useful synthesis with a load-bearing 'necessary' that the evidence doesn't support; worth a referee, but the authors should soften the modal claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.16355 v2 pith:3EDGPP6D submitted 2024-12-20 cs.AI

Adam Davies , Elisa Nguyen , Michael Simeone , Erik Johnston , Martin Gubri This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.AI
keywords foundationmodelssocialresponsibilitysciencesociotechnicalsystemsofpowertechnologicalaffordancesinterdisciplinaryresearchAIethics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This position paper argues that foundation models cannot be made socially responsible by technical means alone. To understand how models reproduce or disrupt existing systems of power, to design interventions that steer models toward beneficial affordances, and to anticipate the consequences of deploying models in specific contexts, social science expertise must be involved at every stage of the research and development pipeline. The paper grounds this claim in prior cases where ignoring social science led to harm, such as social media's documented effects on teen mental health and the persistence of gender and racial bias in web-derived training data. It then proposes a three-part conceptual framework and practical incentives to make interdisciplinary collaboration the norm.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing concept is 'technological affordances'—the actions a technology enables, encourages, or constrains relative to its environment—placed within the study of 'systems of power,' the institutions and norms that distribute privilege and inequality. The paper maps these onto the foundation model pipeline, distinguishing model providers from deployers and assigning each responsibilities: providers must proactively study how training data encodes systems of power, while deployers must consult the relevant social-science disciplines to anticipate application-specific impacts and design mitigation strategies. This framework carries the argument by converting the abstract demand for 'socially responsible AI' into concrete questions at each pipeline stage.

What would settle it

If internal Facebook or Instagram documents were to show that the teams were closed for reasons unrelated to advertising revenue, or that the findings were implemented at scale, the paper's central example of what happens when social science is ignored would stop supporting its conclusion. A more direct test would compare a model deployed with embedded social scientists against an otherwise identical deployment without them, measuring whether downstream social harms actually differ.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that socially responsible foundation models require the integration of social science throughout the model pipeline, from data collection and training to deployment and retirement. It decomposes this operationalization into three components—understanding systems of power, designing technical interventions, and anticipating social impacts—and argues that while AI researchers are equipped for the technical middle, the other two are properly the domain of social scientists. The paper asserts that ignoring this division of labor has already produced real harms, and that proactive interdisciplinary collaboration is therefore not optional but necessary.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's concrete example of harm, Facebook and Instagram ignoring internal mental-health findings, rests on journalistic accounts rather than peer-reviewed evidence, and the necessity argument would be weakened if those accounts misrepresent what happened.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Model providers would need to document and communicate learned biases to downstream deployers, for instance through model cards or dataset documentation.
  • Deployment decisions would require consultation with domain-appropriate social scientists before launch, not after harm occurs.
  • Research incentives would need to change so that interdisciplinary work is recognized in hiring, funding, and publication, rather than penalized.
  • Technical interventions like debiasing are not a 'silver bullet'; they must be coupled with social-science understanding of the context in which the model operates.
  • Firms that prioritize social responsibility in foundation models may see long-term financial benefits, consistent with evidence that high-ESG and high-CSR firms perform better.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the framework is correct, model evaluation benchmarks should include measures of how well a model reproduces or disrupts systems of power, not just statistical bias metrics.
  • The argument implies that AI researchers cannot unilaterally define 'human values' for reinforcement learning from human feedback without social science input on cultural variability and contestation.
  • A testable extension would compare foundation model deployments with and without embedded social scientists, measuring whether downstream social harms actually differ.
  • The incentive analysis suggests that voluntary corporate action alone may be insufficient; regulatory or standards-setting pressure might be needed to break the 'race to the bottom' among providers.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This position paper argues that social science expertise is necessary throughout the foundation model R&D pipeline to operationalize social responsibility. It proposes a three-component framework: understanding systems of power, designing technical interventions, and anticipating social impacts. It reviews historical examples (social media and teen mental health, Wikipedia gender bias, beauty filters) and discusses incentives for firms and researchers, ending with a list of suggestions for fostering interdisciplinary collaboration.

Significance. The paper offers a readable synthesis of existing literature and a structured framework for integrating social science into AI development. Its strengths include explicitly decomposing the R&D pipeline into stages, linking technical concepts (affordances, bias mitigation) to social-science concepts (systems of power, fields of visibility), and proposing concrete institutional suggestions. The paper does not present new empirical evidence, but it makes a programmatic case. However, the central 'necessity' claim is not supported by the examples; the paper is better characterized as arguing for the value and importance of social science input.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3, first paragraph] The paper states that 'it is necessary to involve social science expertise throughout the foundation model R&D process' and that 'interdisciplinary collaboration between AI and social science is required.' The evidence in Section 2 (Facebook/Instagram case) actually shows that social science expertise was present in internal research teams, yet the recommendations were not implemented because of advertising revenue incentives (Hao, 2021; Mac & Kang, 2021). This case supports an incentive/structural explanation, not a lack-of-expertise explanation. Moreover, Appendix A concedes that interdisciplinary research can be expensive and may dilute focus, implying a tradeoff. The paper does not rule out substitutes such as consulting existing social-science literature, external audits, or regulation. Without ruling out cheaper substitutes, the modal claim 'necessary/required' overstates what the evidence shows. Please either weaken the claim to 'important' or 'valuable,' or define what standard of social responsibility requires ongoing collaboration and argue why alternatives cannot meet that standard.
  2. [Section 4, Incentives for Tech Firms] The paragraph beginning 'As outlined by Gillan et al. (2021)' presents ESG/CSR financial-performance evidence and then states 'Thus, we hypothesize that tech firms prioritizing social responsibility in providing and deploying foundation models may observe similar financial benefits.' This is explicitly a speculative analogy. Since the paper's incentive argument partly relies on this alignment, the distinction between established findings and the hypothesis should be made clearer, and the limitations of the analogy (e.g., differences between measurable ESG metrics and model-specific social responsibility) should be discussed. This point does not support the 'necessity' thesis and should not be presented as if it does.
  3. [Section 2, Social Media and Teen Mental Health] The paper asserts that ignoring social-science findings 'has led to serious real-world harms' and cites Wells et al. (2021), Hao (2021), and Mac & Kang (2021) as evidence. These are journalistic accounts of internal company documents and whistleblower testimony; they are not peer-reviewed, and the internal studies' findings are not independently verified. The claim that the 'teams conducting this research were shuttered' is a strong factual assertion that relies on the same reporting. Please either use stronger sources or explicitly acknowledge the evidentiary status of these reports. This matters because the Facebook/Instagram case is the main concrete historical example of harm.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3, Responsible Model Providers paragraph] There is a typo: 'igredient' should be 'ingredient.'
  2. [Section 2, Social Media and Teen Mental Health paragraph] There is a typo: 'instace' should be 'instance.'
  3. [Figure 1] Figure 1 is not referenced in the text; please add an explicit reference and a brief explanation of how the pipeline stages relate to the proposed framework.
  4. [References] The citation for 'Protecting Kids Online, 2021' is formatted inconsistently with the other references; it appears to be a Senate hearing and should be given a proper citation with the committee name and date.
  5. [Section 3, Responsible Model Providers paragraph] The concept of 'fields of visibility' from Beytía & Wagner (2022) is mentioned without definition; a brief explanation would help readers unfamiliar with this framework.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a position paper whose normative argument rests on external examples, not on fitted inputs or self-citation chains.

full rationale

arXiv:2412.16355 is a position paper, not a derivation: it contains no equations, no fitted parameters, and no predictive claim whose output is constructed from its own input. The central claim in Section 3 ('it is necessary to involve social science expertise throughout the foundation model R&D process') is supported by external examples (the Wikipedia gender gap, social media beauty filters, teen mental health) and by a decomposition of social responsibility into components that the authors argue are 'better suited to social scientists.' Even if one disputes the modal strength ('necessary' versus 'beneficial') or the sufficiency of the evidence, that is an evidential or correctness concern, not circularity: the conclusion is not defined into existence, and the supporting examples come from outside the paper. The only self-citations are peripheral: Kim et al. 2023 appears in a list of data-privacy concerns and Mannekote et al. 2024 appears in a list of digital-divide concerns; neither is load-bearing, and both point to independent peer-reviewed work. Appendix A does concede that interdisciplinary research is expensive and can dilute focus, but this is a stated limitation rather than a circular step. No load-bearing step reduces to its own input, so the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted parameters or new entities. Its argument rests on domain assumptions drawn from social science and on cited empirical literature, especially the representativeness of historical examples and the generalizability of ESG findings to AI firms. The proposed framework is a categorization, not a quantitative model.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Foundation models are sociotechnical systems whose impacts are mediated by pre-existing systems of power.
    Section 2 and Section 3 build on this social science framing without comparing it to alternative frameworks or proving its adequacy for foundation models.
  • domain assumption Technical interventions alone cannot adequately address social harms; social science expertise is necessary.
    This is the central thesis, supported by examples rather than by systematic evidence. It appears at the start of Section 3 and in the conclusion.
  • domain assumption Web-scraped training data systematically reproduce societal under- and misrepresentation, and models learn these patterns.
    Section 3 uses the Wikipedia gender gap as a worked example, but the claim that this generalizes across all foundation model data is assumed.
  • domain assumption The Facebook and Instagram internal studies, as reported in the press, accurately show that engagement-based algorithms harmed teen mental health and that fixes were suppressed for profit.
    Section 2 relies on Wells et al. 2021, Hao 2021, and Senate testimony rather than on peer-reviewed causal evidence, making this a load-bearing premise for the paper's central historical lesson.
  • domain assumption Firms with stronger CSR and ESG profiles experience lower risk and better financial performance, and this relationship generalizes to foundation model providers and deployers.
    Section 4 cites Lins et al. 2016 and Hong et al. 2019, and the generalization to AI firms is explicitly presented as a hypothesis rather than a demonstrated fact.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Social Science Is Necessary for Operationalizing Socially Responsible Foundation Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3EDGPP6D

@misc{pith2026241216355,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Social Science Is Necessary for Operationalizing Socially Responsible Foundation Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3EDGPP6D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.16355}
}
read the original abstract

With the rise of foundation models, there is growing concern about their potential social impacts. Social science has a long history of studying the social impacts of transformative technologies in terms of pre-existing systems of power and how these systems are disrupted or reinforced by new technologies. In this position paper, we build on prior work studying the social impacts of earlier technologies to propose a conceptual framework studying foundation models as sociotechnical systems, incorporating social science expertise to better understand how these models affect systems of power, anticipate the impacts of deploying these models in various applications, and study the effectiveness of technical interventions intended to mitigate social harms. We advocate for an interdisciplinary and collaborative research paradigm between AI and social science across all stages of foundation model research and development to promote socially responsible research practices and use cases, and outline several strategies to facilitate such research.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.16355 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Steps of the Foundation Model R&D pipeline. The top pipeline illustrates the stages for training a foundation model (providers), while the bottom pipeline describes the stages of deploying foundation models (deployers). content at a far higher rate than systems that do not (Banker & Khetani, 2019). For instace, despite early internal user studies conducted at Facebook and Instagram finding that simple adjustments to… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

101 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION format.date year duplicate empty "emp...

  2. [2]

    Learning from ricardo and thompson: Machinery and labor in the early industrial revolution and in the age of artificial intelligence

    Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson. Learning from ricardo and thompson: Machinery and labor in the early industrial revolution and in the age of artificial intelligence. Annual Review of Economics, 16 0 (1): 0 597--621, 2024

    2024

  3. [3]

    Tasks at work: Comparative advantage, technology and labor demand

    Daron Acemoglu, Fredric Kong, and Pascual Restrepo. Tasks at work: Comparative advantage, technology and labor demand. 2024

    2024

  4. [4]

    Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in k-12 settings

    Selin Akgun and Christine Greenhow. Artificial intelligence in education: Addressing ethical challenges in k-12 settings. AI and Ethics, 2 0 (3): 0 431--440, 2022

    2022

  5. [5]

    Amelink, Dustin M

    Catherine T. Amelink, Dustin M. Grote, Matthew B. Norris, and Jacob R. Grohs. Transdisciplinary Learning Opportunities : Exploring Differences in Complex Thinking Skill Development Between STEM and Non - STEM Majors . Innovative Higher Education, 49 0 (1): 0 153--176, February 2024. ISSN 1573-1758. doi:10.1007/s10755-023-09682-5. URL https://doi.org/10.10...

    work page doi:10.1007/s10755-023-09682-5 2024

  6. [6]

    Foundational challenges in assuring alignment and safety of large language models

    Usman Anwar, Abulhair Saparov, Javier Rando, Daniel Paleka, Miles Turpin, Peter Hase, Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Erik Jenner, Stephen Casper, Oliver Sourbut, et al. Foundational challenges in assuring alignment and safety of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.09932, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    The responsibility to protect as a duty of care in international law and practice

    Louise Arbour. The responsibility to protect as a duty of care in international law and practice. Review of International Studies, 34 0 (3): 0 445--458, 2008

    2008

  8. [8]

    Aya 23: Open weight releases to further multilingual progress

    Viraat Aryabumi, John Dang, Dwarak Talupuru, Saurabh Dash, David Cairuz, Hangyu Lin, Bharat Venkitesh, Madeline Smith, Kelly Marchisio, Sebastian Ruder, et al. Aya 23: Open weight releases to further multilingual progress. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.15032, 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 101 references
  1. [9]

    The association between use of social media and the development of body dysmorphic disorder and attitudes toward cosmetic surgeries: a national survey

    Khadijah Ateq, Mohammed Alhajji, and Noara Alhusseini. The association between use of social media and the development of body dysmorphic disorder and attitudes toward cosmetic surgeries: a national survey. Frontiers in Public Health, 12: 0 1324092, 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Algorithmic bias in education

    Ryan S Baker and Aaron Hawn. Algorithmic bias in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, pp.\ 1--41, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Algorithm overdependence: How the use of algorithmic recommendation systems can increase risks to consumer well-being

    Sachin Banker and Salil Khetani. Algorithm overdependence: How the use of algorithmic recommendation systems can increase risks to consumer well-being. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 38 0 (4): 0 500--515, 2019

    2019

  4. [12]

    Adolescent social media use and mental health from adolescent and parent perspectives

    Christopher T Barry, Chloe L Sidoti, Shanelle M Briggs, Shari R Reiter, and Rebecca A Lindsey. Adolescent social media use and mental health from adolescent and parent perspectives. Journal of adolescence, 61: 0 1--11, 2017

    2017

  5. [13]

    Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code

    Ruha Benjamin. Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Polity, 2019. ISBN 9781509526390. URL https://politybooks.com/bookdetail/?isbn=9781509526390

    2019

  6. [14]

    Visibility layers: a framework for systematising the gender gap in Wikipedia content

    Pablo Beytía and Claudia Wagner. Visibility layers: a framework for systematising the gender gap in Wikipedia content. Internet Policy Review, 11 0 (1), March 2022. ISSN 2197-6775. URL https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/visibility-layers-framework-systematising-gender...

    2022

  7. [15]

    On hate scaling laws for data-swamps

    Abeba Birhane, Vinay Prabhu, Sang Han, and Vishnu Naresh Boddeti. On hate scaling laws for data-swamps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.13141, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Why you can’t model away bias

    Katherine Bode. Why you can’t model away bias. Modern Language Quarterly, 81 0 (1): 0 95--124, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Hudson, Ehsan Adeli, Russ Altman, Simran Arora, Sydney von Arx, Michael S

    Rishi Bommasani, Drew A. Hudson, Ehsan Adeli, Russ Altman, Simran Arora, Sydney von Arx, Michael S. Bernstein, Jeannette Bohg, Antoine Bosselut, Emma Brunskill, Erik Brynjolfsson, S. Buch, Dallas Card, Rodrigo Castellon, Niladri S. Chatterji, Annie S. Chen, Kathleen A. Creel, ...

    2021

  10. [18]

    White supremacy and racism in the post-civil rights era

    Eduardo Bonilla-Silva. White supremacy and racism in the post-civil rights era. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2001

    2001

  11. [19]

    The use of social media in children and adolescents: Scoping review on the potential risks

    Elena Bozzola, Giulia Spina, Rino Agostiniani, Sarah Barni, Rocco Russo, Elena Scarpato, Antonio Di Mauro, Antonella Vita Di Stefano, Cinthia Caruso, Giovanni Corsello, et al. The use of social media in children and adolescents: Scoping review on the potential risks. Internati...

    2022

  12. [20]

    Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success

    Lindell Bromham, Russell Dinnage, and Xia Hua. Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success. Nature, 534 0 (7609): 0 684--687, 2016. doi:10.1038/NATURE18315

    2016 doi

  13. [21]

    Snapchat lenses and body image concerns

    Kaitlyn Burnell, Allycen R Kurup, and Marion K Underwood. Snapchat lenses and body image concerns. New Media & Society, 24 0 (9): 0 2088--2106, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research

    Lisa M Campbell. Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research. Conservation biology, 19 0 (2): 0 574--577, 2005

    2005

  15. [23]

    The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making

    Valerio Capraro, Austin Lentsch, Daron Acemoglu, Selin Akgun, Aisel Akhmedova, Ennio Bilancini, Jean-Fran c ois Bonnefon, Pablo Bra \ n as-Garza, Luigi Butera, Karen M Douglas, et al. The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy mak...

    2024

  16. [24]

    The statistical fairness field guide: perspectives from social and formal sciences

    Alycia N Carey and Xintao Wu. The statistical fairness field guide: perspectives from social and formal sciences. AI and Ethics, 3 0 (1): 0 1--23, 2023

    2023

  17. [25]

    Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models

    Nicholas Carlini, Florian Tramèr, Eric Wallace, Matthew Jagielski, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Katherine Lee, Adam Roberts, Tom Brown, Dawn Song, Úlfar Erlingsson, Alina Oprea, and Colin Raffel. Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models . August 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Antonio A. Casilli. Waiting for Robots : The Hired Hands of Automation . The France Chicago Collection . University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, January 2025. ISBN 978-0-226-82095-8. URL https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/W/bo239039613.html

    2025

  19. [27]

    Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences

    Paul F Christiano, Jan Leike, Tom Brown, Miljan Martic, Shane Legg, and Dario Amodei. Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  20. [28]

    Black Feminist Thought : Knowledge , Consciousness , and the Politics of Empowerment

    Patricia Hill Collins. Black Feminist Thought : Knowledge , Consciousness , and the Politics of Empowerment . Routledge, New York, 2 edition, 2000. ISBN 978-0-203-90005-5. doi:10.4324/9780203900055

    doi

  21. [29]

    Facilitating interdisciplinary research

    Committee on Science and Public Policy and Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research . Facilitating interdisciplinary research. National Academies Press, 2005

    2005

  22. [30]

    Algorithms, addiction, and adolescent mental health: An interdisciplinary study to inform state-level policy action to protect youth from the dangers of social media

    Nancy Costello, Rebecca Sutton, Madeline Jones, Mackenzie Almassian, Amanda Raffoul, Oluwadunni Ojumu, Meg Salvia, Monique Santoso, Jill R Kavanaugh, and S Bryn Austin. Algorithms, addiction, and adolescent mental health: An interdisciplinary study to inform state-level policy...

    2023

  23. [31]

    Mapping the Margins : Intersectionality , Identity Politics , and Violence against Women of Color

    Kimberle Crenshaw. Mapping the Margins : Intersectionality , Identity Politics , and Violence against Women of Color . Stanford Law Review, 43 0 (6): 0 1241--1299, 1991. ISSN 0038-9765. doi:10.2307/1229039. URL https://www.jstor.org/stable/1229039. Publisher: Stanford Law Review

    1991

  24. [32]

    Mind the gap! on the future of ai research

    Emma Dahlin. Mind the gap! on the future of ai research. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8 0 (1): 0 1--4, 2021

    2021

  25. [33]

    The llama 3 herd of models

    Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Amy Yang, Angela Fan, et al. The llama 3 herd of models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21783, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    real me versus social media me:

    Janella Eshiet. “real me versus social media me:” filters, snapchat dysmorphia, and beauty perceptions among young women. 2020

    2020

  27. [35]

    Automating Inequality : How High - Tech Tools Profile , Police , and Punish the Poor

    Virginia Eubanks. Automating Inequality : How High - Tech Tools Profile , Police , and Punish the Poor . St. Martin's Press, New York, January 2018. ISBN 978-1-250-07431-7

    2018

  28. [36]

    AI Act , 2023

    European Parliament . AI Act , 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Assessing gender bias in W ikipedia: Inequalities in article titles

    Agnieszka Falenska and \"O zlem C etino g lu. Assessing gender bias in W ikipedia: Inequalities in article titles. In Marta Costa-jussa, Hila Gonen, Christian Hardmeier, and Kellie Webster (eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Gender Bias in Natural Language Processing, p...

    2021 doi

  30. [38]

    Wikipedia gender gap: a scoping review

    N \'u ria Ferran-Ferrer, Juan-Jos \'e Bot \'e -Vericad, and Juli \`a Minguill \'o n. Wikipedia gender gap: a scoping review. El Profesional de la informaci \'o n , 2023. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:266344769

    2023

  31. [39]

    The pile: An 800gb dataset of diverse text for language modeling

    Leo Gao, Stella Biderman, Sid Black, Laurence Golding, Travis Hoppe, Charles Foster, Jason Phang, Horace He, Anish Thite, Noa Nabeshima, Shawn Presser, and Connor Leahy. The pile: An 800gb dataset of diverse text for language modeling. CoRR, abs/2101.00027, 2021. URL https://a...

    2021 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Gillan, Andrew Koch, and Laura T

    Stuart L. Gillan, Andrew Koch, and Laura T. Starks. Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66: 0 101889, February 2021. ISSN 09291199. doi:10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2021.101889. URL https://linkinghub.else...

    2021

  33. [41]

    First women, second sex: Gender bias in wikipedia

    Eduardo Graells-Garrido, Mounia Lalmas, and Filippo Menczer. First women, second sex: Gender bias in wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Hypertext & Social Media, HT '15, pp.\ 165–174, New York, NY, USA, 2015. Association for Computing Machinery. ISBN 97814...

    2015

  34. [42]

    Grynbaum and Ryan Mac

    Michael M. Grynbaum and Ryan Mac. The Times Sues OpenAI and Microsoft Over A . I . Use of Copyrighted Work . The New York Times, December 2023. ISSN 0362-4331. URL https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/27/business/media/new-york-times-open-ai-microsoft-lawsuit.html

    2023

  35. [43]

    Reviewing the impact of social media on the mental health of adolescents and young adults

    Chirag Gupta, Sangita Jogdand, and Mayank Kumar. Reviewing the impact of social media on the mental health of adolescents and young adults. Cureus, 14 0 (10), 2022

    2022

  36. [44]

    The facebook whistleblower says its algorithms are dangerous

    Karen Hao. The facebook whistleblower says its algorithms are dangerous. here’s why. MIT Technology Review, 5 0 (10): 0 2021, 2021

    2021

  37. [45]

    Equality of opportunity in supervised learning

    Moritz Hardt, Eric Price, and Nati Srebro. Equality of opportunity in supervised learning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 29, 2016

    2016

  38. [46]

    Artificial intelligence in the information ecosystem: Affordances for everyday information seeking

    Noora Hirvonen, Ville Jylh \"a , Yucong Lao, and Stefan Larsson. Artificial intelligence in the information ecosystem: Affordances for everyday information seeking. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2023

    2023

  39. [47]

    Hong, Jeffrey D

    Harrison G. Hong, Jeffrey D. Kubik, Inessa Liskovich, and José A. Scheinkman. Crime, Punishment and the Value of Corporate Social Responsibility , October 2019. URL https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2492202

    2019

  40. [48]

    Embedding ethics in computer science courses: Does it work? In Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education-Volume 1, pp.\ 481--487, 2022

    Diane Horton, Sheila A McIlraith, Nina Wang, Maryam Majedi, Emma McClure, and Benjamin Wald. Embedding ethics in computer science courses: Does it work? In Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education-Volume 1, pp.\ 481--487, 2022

    2022

  41. [49]

    Bias in wikipedia

    Christoph Hube. Bias in wikipedia. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion, WWW '17 Companion, pp.\ 717–721. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 2017. ISBN 9781450349147. doi:10.1145/3041021.3053375. URL https://...

    2017

  42. [50]

    How academic sabbaticals are used and how they contribute to research – a small-scale study of the University of Cambridge using interviews and analysis of administrative data

    Becky Ioppolo and Steven Wooding. How academic sabbaticals are used and how they contribute to research – a small-scale study of the University of Cambridge using interviews and analysis of administrative data. F1000Research, 11: 0 36, March 2023. ISSN 2046-1402. doi:10.12688/...

    2023 doi

  43. [51]

    ‘what lies behind the filter?’uncovering the motivations for using augmented reality (ar) face filters on social media and their effect on well-being

    Ana Javornik, Ben Marder, Jennifer Brannon Barhorst, Graeme McLean, Yvonne Rogers, Paul Marshall, and Luk Warlop. ‘what lies behind the filter?’uncovering the motivations for using augmented reality (ar) face filters on social media and their effect on well-being. Computers in...

    2022

  44. [52]

    Mistral 7b

    Albert Q Jiang, Alexandre Sablayrolles, Arthur Mensch, Chris Bamford, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Diego de las Casas, Florian Bressand, Gianna Lengyel, Guillaume Lample, Lucile Saulnier, et al. Mistral 7b. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.06825, 2023

    arXiv

  45. [54]

    Lessons from Archives : Strategies for Collecting Sociocultural Data in Machine Learning

    Eun Seo Jo and Timnit Gebru. Lessons from Archives : Strategies for Collecting Sociocultural Data in Machine Learning . In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness , Accountability , and Transparency , pp.\ 306--316, January 2020 b . doi:10.1145/3351095.3372829. URL http...

    2020

  46. [55]

    Mediated discourse analysis and the digital humanities

    Rodney Jones. Mediated discourse analysis and the digital humanities. In Svenja Adolphs and Dawn Knight (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English Language and Digital Humanities, Routledge Handbooks in English Language Studies. Routledge, May 2020. URL https://centaur.reading....

    2020

  47. [56]

    Trustworthy tech companies: talking the talk or walking the walk? AI and Ethics, 4 0 (2): 0 169--177, 2024

    Esther Keymolen. Trustworthy tech companies: talking the talk or walking the walk? AI and Ethics, 4 0 (2): 0 169--177, 2024

    2024

  48. [57]

    ProPILE : Probing Privacy Leakage in Large Language Models

    Siwon Kim, Sangdoo Yun, Hwaran Lee, Martin Gubri, Sungroh Yoon, and Seong Joon Oh. ProPILE : Probing Privacy Leakage in Large Language Models . In NeurIPS 2023 , July 2023. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.01881

    2023 arXiv

  49. [58]

    Provocations from the humanities for generative ai research

    Lauren Klein, Meredith Martin, Andr \'e Brock, Maria Antoniak, Melanie Walsh, Jessica Marie Johnson, Lauren Tilton, and David Mimno. Provocations from the humanities for generative ai research. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.19190, 2025

    2025

  50. [59]

    P. M. Krafft, Meg Young, Michael Katell, Karen Huang, and Ghislain Bugingo. Defining ai in policy versus practice. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, AIES '20, pp.\ 72–78, New York, NY, USA, 2020. Association for Computing Machinery. ISBN 978...

    2020

  51. [60]

    Lins, Henri Servaes, and Ane Tamayo

    Karl V. Lins, Henri Servaes, and Ane Tamayo. Social Capital , Trust , and Firm Performance : The Value of Corporate Social Responsibility during the Financial Crisis , October 2016. URL https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2555863

    2016

  52. [61]

    Organization theory and postmodern thought

    Stephen Andrew Linstead. Organization theory and postmodern thought. 2003

    2003

  53. [62]

    Counting carbon: A survey of factors influencing the emissions of machine learning

    Alexandra Sasha Luccioni and Alex Hernandez-Garcia. Counting carbon: A survey of factors influencing the emissions of machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.08476, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  54. [63]

    The problem with annotation

    Clément Le Ludec, Maxime Cornet, and Antonio A Casilli. The problem with annotation. human labour and outsourcing between france and madagascar. Big Data & Society, 10 0 (2): 0 20539517231188723, 2023. doi:10.1177/20539517231188723

    2023 doi

  55. [64]

    Whistle- Blower Says Facebook ‘ Chooses Profits Over Safety ’

    Ryan Mac and Cecilia Kang. Whistle- Blower Says Facebook ‘ Chooses Profits Over Safety ’. The New York Times, October 2021. ISSN 0362-4331. URL https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/03/technology/whistle-blower-facebook-frances-haugen.html

    2021

  56. [65]

    Large language models for whole-learner support: opportunities and challenges

    Amogh Mannekote, Adam Davies, Juan D Pinto, Shan Zhang, Daniel Olds, Noah L Schroeder, Blair Lehman, Diego Zapata-Rivera, and ChengXiang Zhai. Large language models for whole-learner support: opportunities and challenges. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7: 0 1460364, 2024

    2024

  57. [66]

    R. Martin. The Sociology of Power. Routledge Revivals. Taylor & Francis, 2024. ISBN 9781003833826. URL https://books.google.com/books?id=N1YIEQAAQBAJ

    2024

  58. [67]

    A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning

    Ninareh Mehrabi, Fred Morstatter, Nripsuta Saxena, Kristina Lerman, and Aram Galstyan. A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. ACM computing surveys (CSUR), 54 0 (6): 0 1--35, 2021

    2021

  59. [68]

    Model cards for model reporting

    Margaret Mitchell, Simone Wu, Andrew Zaldivar, Parker Barnes, Lucy Vasserman, Ben Hutchinson, Elena Spitzer, Inioluwa Deborah Raji, and Timnit Gebru. Model cards for model reporting. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, FAT* ’19. ACM,...

    2019

  60. [69]

    Feder Cooper, Daphne Ippolito, Christopher A

    Milad Nasr, Nicholas Carlini, Jonathan Hayase, Matthew Jagielski, A. Feder Cooper, Daphne Ippolito, Christopher A. Choquette-Choo, Eric Wallace, Florian Tramèr, and Katherine Lee. Scalable Extraction of Training Data from ( Production ) Language Models , November 2023. URL htt...

    2023 arXiv

  61. [70]

    Nataliya Nedzhvetskaya and J. S. Tan. The role of workers in ai ethics and governance. In The Oxford Handbook of AI Governance. Oxford University Press, 04 2024. ISBN 9780197579329. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197579329.013.68. URL https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197579329.013.68

    2024

  62. [71]

    Algorithms of Oppression : How Search Engines Reinforce Racism

    Safiya Umoja Noble. Algorithms of Oppression : How Search Engines Reinforce Racism . NYU Press, 2018. ISBN 978-1-4798-4994-9. doi:10.2307/j.ctt1pwt9w5. URL https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1pwt9w5

    2018 doi

  63. [72]

    Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback

    Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, John Schulman, Jacob Hilton, Fraser Kelton, Luke Miller, Maddie Simens, Amanda Askell, Peter Welinder, Paul F Christiano, Jan Leike, a...

    2022

  64. [73]

    Fairness in deep learning: A survey on vision and language research

    Otavio Parraga, Martin D More, Christian M Oliveira, Nathan S Gavenski, Lucas S Kupssinsk \"u , Adilson Medronha, Luis V Moura, Gabriel S Sim \ o es, and Rodrigo C Barros. Fairness in deep learning: A survey on vision and language research. ACM Computing Surveys, 57 0 (6): 0 1...

    2025

  65. [74]

    Barriers to interdisciplinary research and training

    Terry C Pellmar, Leon Eisenberg, et al. Barriers to interdisciplinary research and training. In Bridging disciplines in the brain, behavioral, and clinical sciences. National Academies Press (US), 2000

    2000

  66. [75]

    Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the whitest of all? racial biases in social media beauty filters

    Piera Riccio, Julien Colin, Shirley Ogolla, and Nuria Oliver. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the whitest of all? racial biases in social media beauty filters. Social Media+ Society, 10 0 (2): 0 20563051241239295, 2024

    2024

  67. [76]

    Poststructuralism against poststructuralism: Actor-network theory, organizations and economic markets

    John Michael Roberts. Poststructuralism against poststructuralism: Actor-network theory, organizations and economic markets. European Journal of Social Theory, 15 0 (1): 0 35--53, 2012

    2012

  68. [77]

    Fat phobia: Measuring, understanding, and changing anti-fat attitudes

    Beatrice “Bean” E Robinson, Lane C Bacon, and Julia O'reilly. Fat phobia: Measuring, understanding, and changing anti-fat attitudes. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 14 0 (4): 0 467--480, 1993

    1993

  69. [78]

    Beauty filters are changing the way young girls see themselves

    Tate Ryan-Mosley. Beauty filters are changing the way young girls see themselves. MIT Technology Review, 2 0 (2021): 0 2021, 2021

    2021

  70. [79]

    everyone wants to do the model work, not the data work

    Nithya Sambasivan, Shivani Kapania, Hannah Highfill, Diana Akrong, Praveen Paritosh, and Lora M Aroyo. “everyone wants to do the model work, not the data work”: Data cascades in high-stakes ai. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CH...

    2021

  71. [80]

    Generative ai meets copyright

    Pamela Samuelson. Generative ai meets copyright. Science, 381 0 (6654): 0 158--161, 2023. doi:10.1126/science.adi0656. URL https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.adi0656

    2023 doi

  72. [81]

    A sociotechnical perspective for the future of ai: narratives, inequalities, and human control

    Laura Sartori and Andreas Theodorou. A sociotechnical perspective for the future of ai: narratives, inequalities, and human control. Ethics and Information Technology, 24 0 (1): 0 4, 2022

    2022

  73. [82]

    Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems

    Andrew D Selbst, Danah Boyd, Sorelle A Friedler, Suresh Venkatasubramanian, and Janet Vertesi. Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In Proceedings of the conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, pp.\ 59--68, 2019

    2019

  74. [83]

    The power of absence: Thinking with archival theory in algorithmic design

    Jihan Sherman, Romi Morrison, Lauren Klein, and Daniela Rosner. The power of absence: Thinking with archival theory in algorithmic design. In Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference, pp.\ 214--223, 2024

    2024

  75. [84]

    The triple bottom line: What is it and how does it work

    Timothy F Slaper, Tanya J Hall, et al. The triple bottom line: What is it and how does it work. Indiana business review, 86 0 (1): 0 4--8, 2011

    2011

  76. [85]

    Dolma: an open corpus of three trillion tokens for language model pretraining research

    Luca Soldaini, Rodney Kinney, Akshita Bhagia, Dustin Schwenk, David Atkinson, Russell Authur, Ben Bogin, Khyathi Chandu, Jennifer Dumas, Yanai Elazar, Valentin Hofmann, Ananya Jha, Sachin Kumar, Li Lucy, Xinxi Lyu, Nathan Lambert, Ian Magnusson, Jacob Morrison, Niklas Muennigh...

    2024

  77. [86]

    Diffusion Art or Digital Forgery ? Investigating Data Replication in Diffusion Models , December 2022

    Gowthami Somepalli, Vasu Singla, Micah Goldblum, Jonas Geiping, and Tom Goldstein. Diffusion Art or Digital Forgery ? Investigating Data Replication in Diffusion Models , December 2022. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2212.03860. arXiv:2212.03860 [cs]

    2022 arXiv

  78. [87]

    Mitigating gender bias in natural language processing: Literature review

    Tony Sun, Andrew Gaut, Shirlyn Tang, Yuxin Huang, Mai ElSherief, Jieyu Zhao, Diba Mirza, Elizabeth Belding, Kai-Wei Chang, and William Yang Wang. Mitigating gender bias in natural language processing: Literature review. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.08976, 2019

    1906 arXiv

  79. [88]

    The ai carbon footprint and responsibilities of ai scientists

    Guglielmo Tamburrini. The ai carbon footprint and responsibilities of ai scientists. Philosophies, 7 0 (1): 0 4, 2022

    2022

  80. [89]

    Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models

    Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timoth \'e e Lacroix, Baptiste Rozi \`e re, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  81. [90]

    Artificial intelligence for social evil: Exploring how ai and beauty filters perpetuate colorism—lessons learned from a colorism giant, brazil

    Juliana Maria Trammel. Artificial intelligence for social evil: Exploring how ai and beauty filters perpetuate colorism—lessons learned from a colorism giant, brazil. In Black Communication in the Age of Disinformation: DeepFakes and Synthetic Media, pp.\ 51--71. Springer, 2023

    2023

  82. [91]

    From filters to fillers: an active inference approach to body image distortion in the selfie era

    Simon C Tremblay, Safae Essafi Tremblay, and Pierre Poirier. From filters to fillers: an active inference approach to body image distortion in the selfie era. AI & society, 36: 0 33--48, 2021

    2021

  83. [92]

    Francesca Tripodi. Ms. categorized: Gender, notability, and inequality on wikipedia. New Media & Society, 25 0 (7): 0 1687--1707, 2023. doi:10.1177/14614448211023772. URL https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211023772

    2023 doi

  84. [93]

    Protecting Kids Online : Testimony from a Facebook Whistleblower , October 2021

    US Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Data Security . Protecting Kids Online : Testimony from a Facebook Whistleblower , October 2021. URL https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2021/10/protecting kids online: testimony from a facebook whistleblower. Sect...

    2021

  85. [94]

    Fairness definitions explained

    Sahil Verma and Julia Rubin. Fairness definitions explained. In Proceedings of the international workshop on software fairness, pp.\ 1--7, 2018

    2018

  86. [95]

    Humans inherit artificial intelligence biases

    Luc \' a Vicente and Helena Matute. Humans inherit artificial intelligence biases. Scientific Reports, 13 0 (1): 0 15737, 2023

    2023

  87. [96]

    Ethical and social risks of harm from language models

    Laura Weidinger, John Mellor, Maribeth Rauh, Conor Griffin, Jonathan Uesato, Po-Sen Huang, Myra Cheng, Mia Glaese, Borja Balle, Atoosa Kasirzadeh, et al. Ethical and social risks of harm from language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.04359, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  88. [97]

    Social media and youth mental health

    Paul E Weigle and Reem MA Shafi. Social media and youth mental health. Current psychiatry reports, 26 0 (1): 0 1--8, 2024

    2024

  89. [98]

    Facebook knows instagram is toxic for teen girls, company documents show

    Georgia Wells, Jeff Horwitz, and Deepa Seetharaman. Facebook knows instagram is toxic for teen girls, company documents show. The Wall Street Journal, 14, 2021

    2021

  90. [99]

    Who should act?: Collective responsibility and the responsibility to protect

    Jennifer M Welsh. Who should act?: Collective responsibility and the responsibility to protect. In The Routledge Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect, pp.\ 103--114. Routledge, 2012

    2012

  91. [100]

    David Gray Widder, Derrick Zhen, Laura Dabbish, and James Herbsleb. It’s about power: What ethical concerns do software engineers have, and what do they (feel they can) do about them? In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp.\...

    2023

  92. [101]

    Duty of care: an analytical approach

    Christian Witting. Duty of care: an analytical approach. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 25 0 (1): 0 33--63, 2005

    2005

  93. [102]

    Affordances for information practices: theorizing engagement among people, technology, and sociocultural environments

    Yuxiang Chris Zhao, Yan Zhang, Jian Tang, and Shijie Song. Affordances for information practices: theorizing engagement among people, technology, and sociocultural environments. Journal of Documentation, 77 0 (1): 0 229--250, 2020

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.