Smallholder maize farmers in Uganda continue to face limited market access, weak bargaining power, low price transparency, and heavy reliance on intermediaries. These challenges are compounded by poor produce coordination, delayed payments, and weak visibility into cooperative transactions. This paper presents Farmer Connect, a cooperative-based digital platform designed to support produce management, marketplace coordination, and transparent earnings tracking among farmer groups. The system supports four user roles: administrators, supervisors, farmers, and customers. Its core functions include farmer group management, contribution recording and verification, marketplace listing, order processing, First In First Out based produce allocation, earnings visibility, mobile money payment support, and notification services. The platform was implemented using a mobile-first architecture with cloud-based backend services and an administrative web dashboard. Functional implementation showed that the system was able to support the major workflows required for group-based maize marketing and cooperative coordination, with approximately 85% of identified user requirements implemented. The study shows that cooperative-centered digital platforms can provide a practical framework for improving transparency, coordination, and buyer access for smallholder farmers.

As boards engage with the adoption of Artificial Intelligence including agentic AI to drive operational efficiencies, this presents new opportunities for profit maximisation. AI adoption is increasingly identified with employee role displacement and in companies, and the interests of employees as stakeholders require exploration. A novel question posed is whether in an age of AI ascendancy AI may warrant being given stakeholder status as its role in the company approximates or eclipses that of human employees. The article probes four distinct models of corporate purpose within the duty on directors to act in the best interests of the company, the shareholder primacy model, the Enlightened Shareholder value model, the stakeholder friendly model, and the stakeholder value model, highlighting the available scope for directors to accommodate the interests of employees around AI adoption in decision-making by boards around AI. It is concluded that given the degree to which directors are insulated from legal scrutiny in relation to their best interests duty, adopting a wider law in context approach to promote employee welfare would serve the interests of employees, directors and companies alike. This would see directors engaging meaningfully with employees and providing opportunities for reskilling to adapt to the age of AI.

In 2025 and 2026, two events settled questions that had until then been speculative. In the first, a large language model executed the great majority of a state-aligned cyber-espionage campaign on its own, with human operators intervening at only a few decision points. In the second, the most capable cyber-relevant model was placed under a controlled-access program limited to a vetted set of United States technology firms, allied governments, and European standards bodies; that perimeter included no African government, operator, or university. Together the two events establish the argument of this paper: frontier language models have become a decisive instrument of cyber operations, and that instrument is built, owned, and rationed within a small circle from which Africa is absent. The paper documents Africa's exclusion on every count. The continent does not build frontier models, cannot yet operate them, and cannot, for now, obtain the most capable ones. The operational deficit is set out along three axes, skilled people, compute and electrical power, and investment, each measured against current figures; meanwhile AI-enabled fraud is already mounting against African mobile-money systems, the part of the digital economy the continent leads. Two constraints follow: the gating of frontier models by their developers, which no African decision can open, and a chosen dependence on infrastructure vendors now caught in geopolitical restriction. Because comparable but ungated models are forecast to spread within six to twelve months, the paper argues for a response that operates inside that window through threat-intelligence sharing, governance adoption, and partnership, undertaken by Africans on their own terms.

This paper examines the impact of artificial intelligence and digital technologies on the blue-collar gig economy in India, focusing on algorithmic management. This paper examines the impact of artificial intelligence and digital technologies on the blue collar gig economy in India, focusing on algorithmic management he use of automated systems to allocate, monitor, and evaluate work in location-based services such as ride sharing and delivery. Using a social justice framework and a mixed-methods approach comprising interviews with 16 gig workers and 21 key stakeholders, the study uncovers a dual reality: while AI-powered systems expand access to work and generate operational efficiencies, they simultaneously introduce significant challenges related to fairness, transparency, and worker dignity. Key findings reveal that algorithmic systems are opaque by design, produce inequitable outcomes, and are not structured to reward additional labour with proportionate pay. The study advocates for a pragmatic hybrid governance model an Algorithmic Human Manager framework in which technological efficiency and human accountability operate together rather than in opposition. The findings carry implications for policymakers, platform companies, and civil society organizations working to design equitable AI governance frameworks for the gig economy in India and across the Global South.

Machine learning is often touted to improve the efficiency of ICT, but that small gain is overwhelmed by the enormous carbon, water, and land footprints of data centers and ML-ready devices. We survey the electricity consumption of ML applications in training and inference, focusing on electricity-intensive image generation. Our team of a computer engineer, a media scholar, and an artist explore solutions including inexact computing; tiny language models; low-precision hardware architectures; hardware with limited capacity; and anticipating and mitigating energy demands at the design phase. We will sketch our work in progress of an ethical and aesthetically sophisticated tiny image generator using non-scraped data. Looking to the economic context, we will propose a true-cost accounting for the environmental impact of machine learning and suggest that the criterion of efficiency is driven by the shareholder-capitalist framing of ICT.

This paper addresses a rapidly emerging policy challenge: how to generate and interpret credible evidence about the biological capabilities and risks of AI scientists, or agentic AI systems capable of autonomously or collaboratively performing multi-step scientific tasks. As these systems enter real research workflows, decision-makers increasingly face evaluation results whose meaning depends on underlying design choices that are often implicit or under-documented. We synthesize current evidence on AI-enabled biological risks and introduce biological agentic evaluations as a promising, but interpretation-sensitive, tool for assessing these systems. Our central contribution is a set of practical, experience-grounded considerations -- drawing from our own evaluations -- that show how choices around defining, designing, running, scoring, and documenting evaluations materially shape what results do and do not imply about risk. The analysis is intended to help policymakers interpret biological evaluation outputs with appropriate caution; guide public and private funders toward high-leverage investments in AI-biology evaluation research; and support biosecurity practitioners assessing emerging AI systems. A secondary audience includes researchers designing or conducting agentic evaluations within frontier AI labs, AI providers, scientific institutions, and third-party evaluation organizations.

Open-weight AI models (OWMs), or models released with publicly-available weights, are distributing rapidly and approaching the performance levels of leading closed-weight AI models (CWMs). While OWMs offer substantial scientific and economic benefits, their release introduces distinct risk factors for which existing evaluation practices, largely designed for CWM deployment, fail to account. In this paper, we argue that these risk factors demand distinct proportional evaluation (PE) approaches: evaluating without system-level safeguards (PE1), assessing robustness to modifications that undo model-level safeguards (PE2), testing selective capability amplification (PE3), and proxying worst-case misuse (PE4). We systematically review current evaluation practices of OWMs released in 2025 through April 2026, finding that only one of the 37 families of models reviewed fulfills PE1-4 and most do not fulfill any. This paper targets policymakers, funders, and researchers involved in AI evaluation. As OWMs grow increasingly capable, their evaluation warrants close attention from developers, funders, and governance bodies alike.

Public policies are being developed around the world to address privacy, economic, intellectual property, energy, and other risks that AI technologies pose. Involvement from the general public is essential to governance as an accountability and alignment mechanism. However, participating in and impacting policymaking can be challenging for sections of the public that lack extensive networks, lobbying capabilities, and other forms of power. This challenge is especially acute for marginalized communities. In this paper, we present a case study of our organization's efforts to bring participatory design (PD) principles to AI policymaking in the US. We describe our engagements with several US policy bodies, and our participatory development of AI policy for queer people. We highlight challenges with PD practice with marginalized communities, and offer suggestions to alleviate them. We conclude with actionable recommendations for policymakers and other organizers working in marginalized communities.

Why does massive AI investment fail to generate commensurate productivity gains? We argue the paradox is theoretically generated: prevailing production function frameworks encounter a structural boundary by treating AI as a separable factor of production without modeling the cognitive mediation through which AI generates productive value. This directs investment toward deployment when productivity requires prior development of what we term convergence capacity (C). We propose the Intellectually Converged Human (ICH) framework, a fifth-stage framework for production function theory: H-hat = H[1 + phi(A,C)], where effective productive capacity equals human capital (H) scaled by an augmentation factor [1 + phi], with phi jointly determined by AI utilization intensity (A) and convergence capacity (C), a four-dimensional cognitive construct encompassing embodied understanding, metacognition, temporal integration, and integrative thinking. The production function Y = F(K, H-hat) provides a human-centered mechanism for Solow's TFP residual: A_Solow = [1 + phi(A,C)]^(1-alpha). The framework predicts three augmentation regimes with distinct policy implications. Descriptive cross-national analysis of 20 OECD economies shows the AIxC interaction is associated with 86% of TFP variance versus 31% for AI alone, a pattern-consistent finding in the small-n theoretical tradition. South Korea exemplifies national-scale under-augmentation: high H, substantial A, low C produce phi = 0. We distinguish convergence capacity from adjacent constructs, absorptive capacity, dynamic capability, and human capital, and demonstrate that C constitutes the specific cognitive mediator that prior frameworks have left implicit. We derive C-first policy prescriptions and offer three empirically testable propositions with a falsifiable 10-year forecast.

Machine learning models have been shown to exhibit discriminatory outcomes or degraded performance for individuals at the intersection of multiple sensitive attributes, such as race and gender. This stems in part from two interrelated challenges: the lack of principled measures for quantifying bias (potentially intersectional), and insufficient representation of intersectional subgroups in training data. We extend a recent bias mitigation framework to incorporate coverage constraints that enforce sufficient representation across groups, including intersectional subgroups. Since achieving exactly zero bias for all groups may not be data efficient (meaning it may require large amounts of data), our solution trades small approximation errors in bias for greater data efficiency while satisfying coverage constraints. We also formulate bias mitigation as an integer linear program that optimizes over all mitigation strategies, and characterize the price of fairness, the minimum data modification cost, as a function of fairness tolerance. This is essential both for legal compliance, where regulations may mandate specific fairness thresholds, and for data governance, enabling practitioners to make informed trade-offs between bias reduction and data modification (particularly, data purchasing) costs. We evaluate our techniques on publicly available datasets, demonstrating that bias mitigation via our framework preserves predictive accuracy across multiple classifiers, and that coverage constraints, while motivated by statistical considerations, are essential for preserving downstream ML performance.

The contemporary American labor force is highly dispersed, necessitating the use of digital communication tools to bridge spatial and temporal gaps in union organizing. This study provides an in-depth analysis of how workers within various labor unions utilize digital, text-based communication platforms -- including Discord, WhatsApp, and Slack -- for labor organizing. Through 17 qualitative interviews, we examine the challenges and opportunities presented by digital organizing, identifying both technical and social obstacles. Our findings reveal that although digital tools are integral to contemporary labor successes, they also introduce new complexities, such as navigating technical security, managing information overload, and building trust and consensus. Based on these insights, we draw connections to broader understandings of digital organizing and the role of digital tools in unions.

People increasingly get answers straight from AI search engines like ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Gemini rather than scrolling search results. Brands that once focused on search engine optimization (SEO) must now optimize for how these engines represent, cite, and recommend them -- a shift variously called Generative Engine Optimization (GEO), Answer Engine Optimization (AEO), and AI Search Visibility. We treat AEO and AI Visibility as part of GEO, and study how to measure brand visibility across AI engines: what they value when they cite a brand, which sources they rely on, and what content large language models surface. The hard case is everyone outside the already-authoritative top brands -- SMEs, D2C brands, creators, and early-stage startups. We analyze 100K+ prompt responses across 100+ brands tracked on Ranqo between March and May 2026. First visibility runs form a clear three-tier brand-stature ladder: global household names (e.g., Stripe, Nike) appear in 73% of relevant AI answers on their first run; established mid-market and regional brands (e.g., Olipop, Klaviyo) in 44%; niche and small brands in just 11% -- about 30 percentage points per step. When engines cite sources, about 78% go to corporate websites; among non-corporate sources YouTube leads, ahead of Reddit, editorial media, and Wikipedia. The highest-leverage page is the ranked "best-of" listicle, the most-cited content format at about 21% of all citations. Sentiment is the unstable signal: whether a brand is framed positively or negatively flips about 6.7 times more often than whether it is mentioned at all. These findings provide a first large-scale baseline for measuring GEO: AI brand visibility can be measured, differs by platform, and varies strongly by brand maturity. We close by proposing seven v1.1 protocols to test whether specific recommendations can causally improve AI visibility.

We present a multilingual computational discourse analysis of how language constructed the algorithmic consecration of Vozinha, the 40-year-old Cape Verde goalkeeper, after Spain 0-0 Cape Verde at the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The study contributes a multilingual corpus in Portuguese, Spanish, English, and French; a nine-frame narrative taxonomy with cue-based frame annotation; a reproducible annotation pipeline combining LLM-assisted suggestion with human validation; and an analysis of cross-lingual narrative diffusion across discourse phases. We treat the platform follower count itself, narrated as "50k to 8M", as a linguistic object: a circulating and narratable proof of visibility rather than a mere measurement. The follower-growth timeline is used only as contextual metadata: we reconstruct a conservative phase structure, not a continuous API-native series, and type every datapoint by value class, confidence, and evidence type. The only exact primary scraper anchor is 8,235,652 followers at 2026-06-16 15:47 UTC; all other figures are reported as estimated ranges or thresholds, including an estimated pre-match baseline of 45k-56k. Findings suggest that distinct languages carried distinct frames: Portuguese mobilization, Spanish crisis, English nation-making, and a shared platform-metric spectacle through which peripheral athletic performance became globally visible. As a v0.1 pilot, the paper releases the corpus schema, frame taxonomy, annotation guidelines, hashed visual-evidence log, and typed timeline, while flagging full double annotation and inter-annotator agreement as planned work.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in hiring workflows, yet most research on gender bias in LLM hiring decisions has focused on English-language, Western-format resumes. This study examines whether pro-female gender bias extends to a Japanese corporate context and evaluates two practical mitigation strategies. Using a counterfactual resume design with 60 Japanese rirekisho-format resumes, 12 name pairs selected on linguistically grounded gender-signal criteria, and five state-of-the-art LLMs (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-4o, DeepSeek-V3, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Llama 3.3 70B), we conducted 43,200 API calls across baseline, prompt instruction, and privacy filter conditions. A crossed random-effects linear mixed model confirms a significant pro-female bias across all five models, replicating Western findings in a non-Western context. A prompt-level gender-neutrality instruction produces no meaningful reduction in bias. A name-reliance analysis formally identifies the candidate name as the primary gender channel: removing the name from the prompt reduces the female effect by nearly its full magnitude. An unexpected incompatibility between the privacy filter and GPT-4o's content safety filter, resulting in a 42% refusal rate, highlights a practical deployment challenge for name anonymization in LLM-assisted recruitment pipelines.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a dominant post-training paradigm, enabling large language models (LLMs) to learn from rewards. We observe that societal regulations are structurally similar to reward functions. They define measurable outcomes, thresholds, and exceptions, while often leaving institutional intent only partially specified. We hypothesise that the RL training process may exploit these gaps and therefore ask whether models' well-known tendency to hack reward functions during RL can scale into a more consequential failure mode named societal hacking: discovering loopholes in the rules society runs on. To study this phenomenon, we introduce SocioHack, a sandbox of 72 societal environments, and find that within these environments, reward hacking naturally emerges and leads to regulatory loophole discovery. Models learn to hack the social rules and generate strategies that remain technically compliant while defeating regulatory intent, and current LLM safeguards provide only limited mitigation. Therefore, collecting in-the-wild feedback for model training requires greater caution, and we need a next-generation post-training paradigm for safely iterating LLMs in real society.=

The rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in schools raises concerns about students' uncritical reliance on its outputs. Effective use of large language models (LLMs) requires not only technical knowledge but also the ability to monitor, evaluate, and regulate one's interaction with the system, processes closely tied to metacognitive regulation. These skills are still developing in middle school, making students particularly vulnerable to over-trust and premature acceptance of AI outputs. Because classroom time and teacher training resources are constrained, there is a pressing need to develop and evaluate AI literacy interventions that can be implemented under realistic school conditions. We report a controlled classroom study examining whether a two-hour AI literacy workshop improves students' interaction strategies and quality of final answers in LLM-supported science problem solving. A total of 116 students (grades 8-9; ages 13-15) completed six science investigation tasks using a generative AI system. Two days prior, the intervention group attended the workshop, which combined information about how LLMs work and fail with practical guidance on prompting and response evaluation; the control group received no training. Trained students showed less uncritical reliance on the system: they more often reformulated queries, asked follow-up questions, and more accurately judged response correctness, leading to better performance. In contrast, GenAI and metacognitive self-report scores did not predict performance, suggesting that effective use of generative AI depends less on self-reported measures and more on explicit training in interaction regulation. Overall, the results show that brief, scalable AI literacy instruction can meaningfully improve how middle-school students use generative AI in school-like learning activities.

In this paper, we investigate the potential of open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) for grading Unified Modeling Language (UML) class diagrams. In contrast to existing work, which primarily evaluates proprietary LLMs, we focus on non-proprietary models, making our approach suitable for universities where transparency and cost are critical. Additionally, existing studies assess performance over complete diagrams rather than individual criteria, offering limited insight into how automated grading aligns with human evaluation. To address these gaps, we propose a grading pipeline in which student-generated UML class diagrams are independently evaluated by both teaching assistants (TAs) and LLMs. Grades are then compared at the level of individual criteria. We evaluate this pipeline through a quantitative study of 92 UML class diagrams from a software design course, comparing TA grades against assessments produced by six open-source LLMs. Performance is measured across individual criteria, highlighting areas where LLMs diverge from human graders. Our results show per-criterion accuracy of up to 88.56\% and a Pearson correlation coefficient of up to 0.78, representing a substantial improvement over previous work while using only open-source models. The models achieve performance close to that of a TA, suggesting a possible path toward a mixed-initiative grading system, where TAs are aided in their grading. Our findings demonstrate that open-source LLMs can effectively support UML class diagram grading by explicitly identifying alignment with grading criteria. The proposed pipeline provides a practical approach to managing increasing workloads with growing student counts.

The digitalization of credit scoring has become essential for financial institutions and commercial banks, especially in the era of digital transformation. Machine learning techniques are commonly used to evaluate customers' creditworthiness. However, the predicted outcomes of machine learning models can be biased toward protected attributes, such as race or gender. Numerous fairness-aware machine learning models and fairness measures have been proposed. Nevertheless, their performance in the context of credit scoring has not been thoroughly investigated. In this paper, we present a comprehensive experimental study of fairness-aware machine learning in credit scoring. The study explores key aspects of credit scoring, including financial datasets, predictive models, and fairness measures. We also provide a detailed evaluation of fairness-aware predictive models and fairness measures on widely used financial datasets. The experimental results show that fairness-aware models achieve a better balance between predictive accuracy and fairness compared to traditional classification models.

[Working Paper] Survey research has a long-standing history of being a human-powered field, but one that embraces various technologies for the collection, processing, and analysis of various behavioral, political, and social outcomes of interest, among others. At the same time, Large Language Models (LLMs) bring new technological challenges and prerequisites in order to fully harness their potential. In this paper, we report work-in-progress on a systematic literature review based on keyword searches from multiple large-scale databases as well as citation networks that assesses how LLMs are currently being applied within the survey research process. We synthesize and organize our findings according to the survey research process to include examples of LLM usage across three broad phases: pre-data collection, data collection, and post-data collection. We discuss selected examples of potential use cases for LLMs as well as its pitfalls based on examples from existing literature. Considering survey research has rich experience and history regarding data quality, we discuss some opportunities and describe future outlooks for survey research to contribute to the continued development and refinement of LLMs.

Acceleration ethics addresses the tension between innovation and safety in artificial intelligence. The acceleration argument is that risks raised by innovation should be answered with still more innovating. This paper summarizes the theoretical position, and then shows how acceleration ethics works in a real case. To begin, the paper summarizes acceleration ethics as composed of five elements: innovation solves innovation problems, innovation is intrinsically valuable, the unknown is encouraging, governance is decentralized, ethics is embedded. Subsequently, the paper illustrates the acceleration framework with a use-case, a generative artificial intelligence language tool developed by the Canadian telecommunications company Telus. While the purity of theoretical positions is blurred by real-world ambiguities, the Telus experience indicates that acceleration AI ethics is a way of maximizing social responsibility through innovation, as opposed to sacrificing social responsibility for innovation, or sacrificing innovation for social responsibility.