Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Provocation: Who benefits from "inclusion" in Generative AI?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2411.09102 v2 pith:HAZE4IAL submitted 2024-11-14 cs.CY cs.AIcs.HC

classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.HC
keywords benefitsstructurescommunityevaluationexplicitgenerativeharmsmarginalized
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The demands for accurate and representative generative AI systems means there is an increased demand on participatory evaluation structures. While these participatory structures are paramount to to ensure non-dominant values, knowledge and material culture are also reflected in AI models and the media they generate, we argue that dominant structures of community participation in AI development and evaluation are not explicit enough about the benefits and harms that members of socially marginalized groups may experience as a result of their participation. Without explicit interrogation of these benefits by AI developers, as a community we may remain blind to the immensity of systemic change that is needed as well. To support this provocation, we present a speculative case study, developed from our own collective experiences as AI researchers. We use this speculative context to itemize the barriers that need to be overcome in order for the proposed benefits to marginalized communities to be realized, and harms mitigated.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Harm is not Universal: Community-Specific Toxicity Detection is Urgently Needed

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SoTA T2I toxicity detectors miss ~35% of disability-community harms; zero-shot CTD fails below random, while ICL/VQA/LoRA improve but stay well below general TD performance.

  2. Evaluating AI-Generated Images of Cultural Artifacts with Community-Informed Rubrics

    cs.CY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Community members from the UK blind community, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu helped define what counts as culturally appropriate depictions of artifacts, and the authors tested whether those definitions can be turned into re...

  3. Evaluating AI-Generated Images of Cultural Artifacts with Community-Informed Rubrics

    cs.CY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Case studies with blind UK residents and people from Kerala and Tamil Nadu demonstrate that community input at the systematization stage produces culturally grounded definitions of appropriateness for text-to-image mo...

  4. Advancing Data Equity: Practitioner Responsibility and Accountability in NLP Data Practices

    cs.CY 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    U.S.-based NLP practitioners report limited hands-on experience with bias mitigation and low familiarity with the U.S. AI Bill of Rights, alongside strong support for governance intervention.

Pith tools