Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have achieved remarkable success in various applications. Sampling-based GNN training, which conducts mini-batch training on sampled subgraphs, has become a promising solution for large-scale graphs. Given the resource-intensive nature of sampling-based GNN training, Neural Processing Units (NPUs), such as the Ascend AI processor, offer a promising alternative due to their high throughput and energy efficiency, making them well-suited for GNN workloads. However, the multi-stage nature of sampling-based training, which involves subgraph sampling, feature gathering, and model training, with different resource requirements and computation volume. This requires careful coordination to fully utilize the heterogeneous computation resources of CPUs and NPUs. In this work, we present AcOrch, a sampling-based GNN training system optimized for CPU-NPU heterogeneous platforms. AcOrch offers fine-grained task orchestration and adopts a two-level pipelined execution model to overlap sampling, gathering, and training. It analyzes the heterogeneous compute features of NPUs and maps tasks to AI Cube (AIC) units, AI Vector (AIV) units, and CPU cores accordingly. Moreove
Very soon, millions of AI agents will proliferate across the economy, autonomously taking billions of actions. Inevitably, things will go wrong. Humans will be defrauded, injured, even killed. Law will somehow have to govern the coming wave. But when an AI causes harm, the first question to answer, before anyone can be held accountable is: Which AI Did It? Identifying AIs is unusually difficult. AIs lack bodies. They can copy, split, merge, swarm, and vanish at will. Even today, a "single" AI agent is often an ensemble of instances based on multiple models. The complexity will only multiply as AI capabilities improve. This Article is the first to comprehensively diagnose the legal problem of identifying AIs. Two kinds of identity are required: "thin" and "thick." Thin identification ties every AI action to some human principal, essential for holding accountable the humans who make and use AI agents. Thick identification distinguishes between AI agents, qua agents -- sorting millions of AI entities into discrete, persistent units with stable, coherent goals, essential where principal-agent problems prevent humans from perfectly controlling AIs. This Article also presents a solution:
There is no 'ordinary' when it comes to AI. The human-AI experience is extraordinarily complex and specific to each person, yet dominant measures such as usability scales and engagement metrics flatten away nuance. We argue for AI phenomenology: a research stance that asks "How did it feel?" beyond the standard questions of "How well did it perform?" when interacting with AI systems. AI phenomenology acts as a paradigm for bidirectional human-AI alignment as it foregrounds users' first-person perceptions and interpretations of AI systems over time. We motivate AI phenomenology as a framework that captures how alignment is experienced, negotiated, and updated between users and AI systems. Tracing a lineage from Husserl through postphenomenology to Actor-Network Theory, and grounding our argument in three studies-two longitudinal studies with "Day", an AI companion, and a multi-method study of agentic AI in software engineering-we contribute a set of replicable methodological toolkits for conducting AI phenomenology research: instruments for capturing lived experience across personal and professional contexts, three design concepts (translucent design, agency-aware value alignment, t
White-box AI (WAI), or explainable AI (XAI) model, a novel tool to achieve the reasoning behind decisions and predictions made by the AI algorithms, makes it more understandable and transparent. It offers a new approach to address key challenges of interpretability and mathematical validation in traditional black-box models. In this paper, WAI-aided wireless communication systems are proposed and investigated thoroughly to utilize the promising capabilities. First, we introduce the fundamental principles of WAI. Then, a detailed comparison between WAI and traditional black-box model is conducted in terms of optimization objectives and architecture design, with a focus on deep neural networks (DNNs) and transformer networks. Furthermore, in contrast to the traditional black-box methods, WAI leverages theory-driven causal modeling and verifiable optimization paths, thereby demonstrating potential advantages in areas such as signal processing and resource allocation. Finally, we outline future research directions for the integration of WAI in wireless communication systems.
This paper investigates the impact of artificial intelligence integration on remote operations, emphasising its influence on both distributed and team cognition. As remote operations increasingly rely on digital interfaces, sensors, and networked communication, AI-driven systems transform decision-making processes across domains such as air traffic control, industrial automation, and intelligent ports. However, the integration of AI introduces significant challenges, including the reconfiguration of human-AI team cognition, the need for adaptive AI memory that aligns with human distributed cognition, and the design of AI fallback operators to maintain continuity during communication disruptions. Drawing on theories of distributed and team cognition, we analyse how cognitive overload, loss of situational awareness, and impaired team coordination may arise in AI-supported environments. Based on real-world intelligent port scenarios, we propose research directions that aim to safeguard human reasoning and enhance collaborative decision-making in AI-augmented remote operations.
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is critical for ensuring trust and accountability, yet its development remains predominantly visual. For blind and low-vision (BLV) users, the lack of accessible explanations creates a fundamental barrier to the independent use of AI-driven assistive technologies. This problem intensifies as AI systems shift from single-query tools into autonomous agents that take multi-step actions and make consequential decisions across extended task horizons, where a single undetected error can propagate irreversibly before any feedback is available. This paper investigates the unique XAI requirements of the BLV community through a comprehensive analysis of user interviews and contemporary research. By examining usage patterns across environmental perception and decision support, we identify a significant modality gap. Empirical evidence suggests that while BLV users highly value conversational explanations, they frequently experience "self-blame" for AI failures. The paper concludes with a research agenda for accessible Explainable AI in agentic systems, advocating for multimodal interfaces, blame-aware explanation design, and participatory development.
With the rapid advancement of generative AI (GenAI), mechanism design adapted to its unique characteristics poses new theoretical and practical challenges. Unlike traditional goods, content from one domain can enhance the training and performance of GenAI models in other domains. For example, OpenAI's video generation model Sora (Liu et al., 2024b) relies heavily on image data to improve video generation quality. In this work, we study nonlinear procurement mechanism design under data transferability, where online platforms employ both human creators and GenAI to satisfy cross-domain content demand. We propose optimal mechanisms that maximize either platform revenue or social welfare and identify the specific properties of GenAI that make such high-dimensional design problems tractable. Our analysis further reveals which domains face stronger competitive pressure and which tend to experience overproduction. Moreover, the growing role of data intermediaries, including labeling companies such as Scale AI and creator organizations such as The Wall Street Journal, introduces a third layer into the traditional platform-creator structure. We show that this three-layer market can result i
The development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including AI in Science (AIS), should be done following the principles of responsible AI. Progress in responsible AI is often quantified through evaluation metrics, yet there has been less work on assessing the robustness and reliability of the metrics themselves. We reflect on prior work that examines the robustness of fairness metrics for recommender systems as a type of AI application and summarise their key takeaways into a set of non-exhaustive guidelines for developing reliable metrics of responsible AI. Our guidelines apply to a broad spectrum of AI applications, including AIS.
While generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) increasingly transforms academic environments, a critical gap exists in understanding and mitigating human biases in AI interactions, such as anchoring and confirmation bias. This position paper advocates for metacognitive AI literacy interventions to help university students critically engage with AI and address biases across the Human-AI interaction workflows. The paper presents the importance of considering (1) metacognitive support with deliberate friction focusing on human bias; (2) bi-directional Human-AI interaction intervention addressing both input formulation and output interpretation; and (3) adaptive scaffolding that responds to diverse user engagement patterns. These frameworks are illustrated through ongoing work on "DeBiasMe," AIED (AI in Education) interventions designed to enhance awareness of cognitive biases while empowering user agency in AI interactions. The paper invites multiple stakeholders to engage in discussions on design and evaluation methods for scaffolding mechanisms, bias visualization, and analysis frameworks. This position contributes to the emerging field of AI-augmented learning by emphasizing the
Artificial intelligence (AI) predictions are increasingly used to inform human decisions. Here, using a behavioral implementation of the classic Newcomb's paradox in 1,305 participants, we show that AI predictions can also shape the reasoning people use to make a decision. In this paradigm, perceived predictive authority can alter how people reason about their future actions, leading them to forgo a guaranteed reward. Over 40% of participants treated AI as such a predictive authority about their own behavior, significantly increasing the odds of forgoing the guaranteed reward by a factor of 3.39 (95% CI: 2.45-4.70) and reducing earnings by 10.7-42.9%. The effect appeared across AI presentations and decision contexts and remained detectable even when predictions repeatedly failed. When people perceive AI as capable of predicting their personal behavior, the mere presence of AI predictions may shape their decision-making, narrowing the futures they consider.
AI systems for software development are rapidly gaining prominence, yet significant challenges remain in ensuring their safety. To address this, Amazon launched the Trusted AI track of the Amazon Nova AI Challenge, a global competition among 10 university teams to drive advances in secure AI. In the challenge, five teams focus on developing automated red teaming bots, while the other five create safe AI assistants. This challenge provides teams with a unique platform to evaluate automated red-teaming and safety alignment methods through head-to-head adversarial tournaments where red teams have multi-turn conversations with the competing AI coding assistants to test their safety alignment. Along with this, the challenge provides teams with a feed of high quality annotated data to fuel iterative improvement. Throughout the challenge, teams developed state-of-the-art techniques, introducing novel approaches in reasoning-based safety alignment, robust model guardrails, multi-turn jail-breaking, and efficient probing of large language models (LLMs). To support these efforts, the Amazon Nova AI Challenge team made substantial scientific and engineering investments, including building a c
Industry actors in the United States have gained extensive influence in conversations about the regulation of general-purpose artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Although industry participation is an important part of the policy process, it can also cause regulatory capture, whereby industry co-opts regulatory regimes to prioritize private over public welfare. Capture of AI policy by AI developers and deployers could hinder such regulatory goals as ensuring the safety, fairness, beneficence, transparency, or innovation of general-purpose AI systems. In this paper, we first introduce different models of regulatory capture from the social science literature. We then present results from interviews with 17 AI policy experts on what policy outcomes could compose regulatory capture in US AI policy, which AI industry actors are influencing the policy process, and whether and how AI industry actors attempt to achieve outcomes of regulatory capture. Experts were primarily concerned with capture leading to a lack of AI regulation, weak regulation, or regulation that over-emphasizes certain policy goals over others. Experts most commonly identified agenda-setting (15 of 17 interviews), adv
Modern Education is not \textit{Modern} without AI. However, AI's complex nature makes understanding and fixing problems challenging. Research worldwide shows that a parent's income greatly influences a child's education. This led us to explore how AI, especially complex models, makes important decisions using Explainable AI tools. Our research uncovered many complexities linked to parental income and offered reasonable explanations for these decisions. However, we also found biases in AI that go against what we want from AI in education: clear transparency and equal access for everyone. These biases can impact families and children's schooling, highlighting the need for better AI solutions that offer fair opportunities to all. This chapter tries to shed light on the complex ways AI operates, especially concerning biases. These are the foundational steps towards better educational policies, which include using AI in ways that are more reliable, accountable, and beneficial for everyone involved.
AI-augmented systems are traditionally designed to streamline human decision-making by minimizing cognitive load, clarifying arguments, and optimizing efficiency. However, in a world where algorithmic certainty risks becoming an Orwellian tool of epistemic control, true intellectual growth demands not passive acceptance but active struggle. Drawing on the dystopian visions of George Orwell and Philip K. Dick - where reality is unstable, perception malleable, and truth contested - this paper introduces Cognitive Dissonance AI (CD-AI): a novel framework that deliberately sustains uncertainty rather than resolving it. CD-AI does not offer closure, but compels users to navigate contradictions, challenge biases, and wrestle with competing truths. By delaying resolution and promoting dialectical engagement, CD-AI enhances reflective reasoning, epistemic humility, critical thinking, and adaptability in complex decision-making. This paper examines the theoretical foundations of the approach, presents an implementation model, explores its application in domains such as ethics, law, politics, and science, and addresses key ethical concerns - including decision paralysis, erosion of user auto
Introduction. AI Ethics is framed distinctly across actors and stakeholder groups. We report results from a case study of OpenAI analysing ethical AI discourse. Method. Research addressed: How has OpenAI's public discourse leveraged 'ethics', 'safety', 'alignment' and adjacent related concepts over time, and what does discourse signal about framing in practice? A structured corpus, differentiating between communication for a general audience and communication with an academic audience, was assembled from public documentation. Analysis. Qualitative content analysis of ethical themes combined inductively derived and deductively applied codes. Quantitative analysis leveraged computational content analysis methods via NLP to model topics and quantify changes in rhetoric over time. Visualizations report aggregate results. For reproducible results, we have released our code at https://github.com/famous-blue-raincoat/AI_Ethics_Discourse. Results. Results indicate that safety and risk discourse dominate OpenAI's public communication and documentation, without applying academic and advocacy ethics frameworks or vocabularies. Conclusions. Implications for governance are presented, along with
This article critically examines the recent hype around AI safety. We first start with noting the nature of the AI safety hype as being dominated by governments and corporations, and contrast it with other avenues within AI research on advancing social good. We consider what 'AI safety' actually means, and outline the dominant concepts that the digital footprint of AI safety aligns with. We posit that AI safety has a nuanced and uneasy relationship with transparency and other allied notions associated with societal good, indicating that it is an insufficient notion if the goal is that of societal good in a broad sense. We note that the AI safety debate has already influenced some regulatory efforts in AI, perhaps in not so desirable directions. We also share our concerns on how AI safety may normalize AI that advances structural harm through providing exploitative and harmful AI with a veneer of safety.
With the growing demand for seamless connectivity and intelligent communication, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and sixth-generation (6G) communication networks has emerged as a transformative paradigm. By embedding AI capabilities across various network layers, this integration enables optimized resource allocation, improved efficiency, and enhanced system robust performance, particularly in intricate and dynamic environments. This paper presents a comprehensive overview of AI and communication for 6G networks, with a focus on emphasizing their foundational principles, inherent challenges, and future research opportunities. We first review the integration of AI and communications in the context of 6G, exploring the driving factors behind incorporating AI into wireless communications, as well as the vision for the convergence of AI and 6G. The discourse then transitions to a detailed exposition of the envisioned integration of AI within 6G networks, delineated across three progressive developmental stages. The first stage, AI for Network, focuses on employing AI to augment network performance, optimize efficiency, and enhance user service experiences. The second st
Personal AI assistants (e.g., Apple Intelligence, Meta AI) offer proactive recommendations that simplify everyday tasks, but their reliance on sensitive user data raises concerns about privacy and trust. To address these challenges, we introduce the Guardian of Data (GOD), a secure, privacy-preserving framework for training and evaluating AI assistants directly on-device. Unlike traditional benchmarks, the GOD model measures how well assistants can anticipate user needs-such as suggesting gifts-while protecting user data and autonomy. Functioning like an AI school, it addresses the cold start problem by simulating user queries and employing a curriculum-based approach to refine the performance of each assistant. Running within a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE), it safeguards user data while applying reinforcement and imitation learning to refine AI recommendations. A token-based incentive system encourages users to share data securely, creating a data flywheel that drives continuous improvement. Specifically, users mine with their data, and the mining rate is determined by GOD's evaluation of how well their AI assistant understands them across categories such as shopping, socia
As multi-agent AI systems become increasingly autonomous, evidence shows they can develop collusive strategies similar to those long observed in human markets and institutions. While human domains have accumulated centuries of anti-collusion mechanisms, it remains unclear how these can be adapted to AI settings. This paper addresses that gap by (i) developing a taxonomy of human anti-collusion mechanisms, including sanctions, leniency & whistleblowing, monitoring & auditing, market design, and governance and (ii) mapping them to potential interventions for multi-agent AI systems. For each mechanism, we propose implementation approaches. We also highlight open challenges, such as the attribution problem (difficulty attributing emergent coordination to specific agents), identity fluidity (agents being easily forked or modified), the boundary problem (distinguishing beneficial cooperation from harmful collusion), and adversarial adaptation (agents learning to evade detection).
Generative AI has recently had a profound impact on various fields, including daily life, research, and education. To explore its efficient utilization in data-driven materials science, we organized a hackathon -- AIMHack2024 -- in July 2024. In this hackathon, researchers from fields such as materials science, information science, bioinformatics, and condensed matter physics worked together to explore how generative AI can facilitate research and education. Based on the results of the hackathon, this paper presents topics related to (1) conducting AI-assisted software trials, (2) building AI tutors for software, and (3) developing GUI applications for software. While generative AI continues to evolve rapidly, this paper provides an early record of its application in data-driven materials science and highlights strategies for integrating AI into research and education.