«Gender Diversity in AI Research»

Disponível aqui

«Summary

Lack of gender diversity in the Artificial Intelligence (AI) workforce is raising growing concerns, but the evidence base about this problem has until now been based on statistics about the workforce of large technology companies or submissions to a small number of prestigious conferences. We build on this literature with a large-scale analysis of gender diversity in AI research using publications from arXiv, a widely-used preprints repository where we have identified AI papers through an expanded keyword analysis, and predicted author gender using a name-to-gender inference service. We study the evolution of gender diversity in various disciplines, countries and institutions, finding that while the share of female co-authors in AI papers is increasing, it has stagnated in disciplines related to computer science. We also find that geography plays an important role in determining the share of female authors in AI papers and that there is a severe gender gap in the top research institutions. We also study the link between female authorship in papers and the citations it receives, finding a strong, positive correlation in research domains related to the impact of information technology on society. Having done this, we examine the semantic differences between AI papers with and without female co-authors. Our results suggest that there are significant differences in machine learning and computer ethics between the United States and the United Kingdom as well as differences in the research focus of papers with female co-authors. We conclude by reporting the results of interviews with female AI researchers and other important stakeholders aimed at interpreting our findings and identifying policies to improve diversity and inclusion in the AI research workforce».

Veja aqui também 

«It’s no secret that female entrepreneurs face more barriers and struggle to access the same opportunities as male entrepreneurs, particularly in financing»

Veja aqui

«Why aren't there more collaborative platforms for social good?»

Leia aqui

«(…)
That’s why Nesta is partnering with Scottish Government to support ideas that might apply this logic to other contexts through the ShareLab Scotland fund. This fund allows us to investigate the potential for platforms or apps to make a difference by sharing information using newly available technology or the internet. We’re already working with HomePointr, a Scottish service that provides a matching service for homeless support workers seeking supported accommodation for new tenants who have been homeless. (…)».

«Good and bad help»

Disponível aqui.

«Foreword

We are at a critical point in all of our social programmes. It is no exaggeration to say that we face a perfect storm. We know that trust and confidence in the deliverers of services are low and falling. We know that both demographic pressures and fiscal constraint affect how much we can spend. And we know that dissatisfaction with public and social programmes is felt as much by the people who use them, as by those who work so hard to provide them.

This report suggests a new way – it highlights the incredibly exciting work going on across the country to build the confidence and ability of individuals and to enable them to make the change necessary to live healthier, happier and more fulfilled lives. This is no quick fix. It involves profound changes in power relations, and a conscious and well evidenced understanding of personal motivation – but the prize is great. The opportunity for people to shape their own life experience, in the way in which they wish, with the support and encouragement of those whose purpose is to serve. If we can genuinely understand the difference between good help and bad help, we stand a chance of ensuring that social programmes are mutually supportive, and effective».

Julia Unwin, CBE, Chair of Advisory Panel