Could Distributed Peer Review Better Decide Grant Funding?
The landscape of academic grant funding is notoriously competitive and plagued by lengthy, bureaucratic processes, exacerbated by difficulties in finding willing reviewers. Distributed […]
At the moment, little guidance, policy or oversight is available regarding technology, AI and academic integrity for teachers and educational leaders.
As I write this, I am using text-to-speech technology, a nifty online feature that enables the reader to listen to, rather than […]
The big idea The scientific community worldwide has mobilized with unprecedented speed to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic, and the emerging research output […]
Transcribing can be a pain, and although recent progress in speech recognition software has helped, it remains a challenge. Speech recognition programs, do, however, raise ethical/consent issues: what if person-identifiable interview data is transcribed or read by someone who was not given the consent to do so? Furthermore, some conversational elements aren’t transcribed well by pattern recognition programs.
Most institutions see the market as the only legitimate form of organization, but different visions towards public policy, some involving artificial intelligence, have been the subject of consideration from academics and politicians alike. Under what circumstances, and to what extent, could artificial intelligence replace the market as the end-all guiding force in crafting reasonable public policy? Brexit may play a leading role in the transition.
Outsourcing our memories — or actually forgetting once-vital skills that no longer matter in our daily lives — has always been with humanity. But how does the drift to artificial intelligence reflect what’s always been the case versus what should be a special case?
In the latest of its monthly series of interdisciplinary microsites addressing important public issues, SAGE Publishing is offering free access to a suite academic articles that focus on artificial intelligence.
The founder of StateReviewer outlines a future where humans are written out of the publication process by artificial intelligence. But is the goal of eradicating bias and other malignancies potentially opening the door to a new set of ills?