research-article

An explainable assistant for multiuser privacy

Authors:

Francesca Mosca,

Jose SuchAuthors Info & Claims

Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Volume 36, Issue 1

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-021-09543-5

Published: 01 April 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Multiuser Privacy (MP) concerns the protection of personal information in situations where such information is co-owned by multiple users. MP is particularly problematic in collaborative platforms such as online social networks (OSN). In fact, too often OSN users experience privacy violations due to conflicts generated by other users sharing content that involves them without their permission. Previous studies show that in most cases MP conflicts could be avoided, and are mainly due to the difficulty for the uploader to select appropriate sharing policies. For this reason, we present ELVIRA, the first fully explainable personal assistant that collaborates with other ELVIRA agents to identify the optimal sharing policy for a collectively owned content. An extensive evaluation of this agent through software simulations and two user studies suggests that ELVIRA, thanks to its properties of being role-agnostic, adaptive, explainable and both utility- and value-driven, would be more successful at supporting MP than other approaches presented in the literature in terms of (i) trade-off between generated utility and promotion of moral values, and (ii) users’ satisfaction of the explained recommended output.

References

[1]

Such J and Criado N Multiparty privacy in social media Communications of the ACM 2018 61 8 74-81

[2]

Besmer, A., & Lipford, H. R. (2010). Moving beyond untagging: Photo privacy in a tagged world. In CHI (pp. 1563–1572). ACM.

[3]

Humbert M, Trubert B, and Huguenin K A survey on interdependent privacy ACM Computing Surveys 2019 52 6 1

[4]

Wisniewski, P., Lipford, H., & Wilson, D. (2012). Fighting for my space: Coping mechanisms for SNS boundary regulation. In CHI (pp. 609–618). ACM.

[5]

Such, J., Porter, J., Preibusch, S., & Joinson, A. (2017). Photo privacy conflicts in social media: A large-scale empirical study. In CHI (pp. 3821–3832). ACM.

[6]

Misra G and Such J How socially aware are social media privacy controls? IEEE Computer 2016 49 3 96-99

[7]

Liang K, Liu JK, Lu R, and Wong DS Privacy concerns for photo sharing in online social networks IEEE Internet Computing 2014 19 2 58-63

[8]

Paci F, Squicciarini A, and Zannone N Survey on access control for community-centered collaborative systems ACM Computing Surveys 2018 51 1 1-38

[9]

Miller T Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences Artificial Intelligence 2018 267 1-38

[10]

Cherubini M, Niksirat K, Boldi M-O, Keopraseuth H, Such J, and Huguenin K When forcing collaboration is the most sensible choice: Desirability of precautionary and dissuasive mechanisms to manage multiparty privacy conflicts Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2021 5 CSCW1 1-36

[11]

Lampinen, A., Lehtinen, V., Lehmuskallio, A., & Tamminen, S. (2011). We’re in it together: Interpersonal management of disclosure in social network services. In CHI (pp. 3217–3226). ACM.

[12]

Acquisti A, Brandimarte L, and Loewenstein G Privacy and human behavior in the age of information Science 2015 347 6221 509-514

[13]

Such, J. (2017). Privacy and autonomous systems. In Proceedings of the 26th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI) (pp. 4761–4767).

[14]

Krasnova H, Spiekermann S, Koroleva K, and Hildebrand T Online social networks: Why we disclose JIT 2010 25 2 109-125

[15]

Mosca, F. (2020). Value-aligned and explainable agents for collective decision making: Privacy application: Doctoral consortium. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS 2020).

[16]

Mosca, F., Such, J. M., & McBurney, P. (2020). Towards a value-driven explainable agent for collective privacy. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems.

[17]

Nissenbaum H A contextual approach to privacy online Daedalus 2011 140 4 32-48

[18]

Winikoff, M. (2017). Towards trusting autonomous systems. In International workshop on engineering multi-agent systems (pp. 3–20). Springer

[19]

Cranefield, S., Oren, N., & Vasconcelos, W. W. (2018). Accountability for practical reasoning agents. In International conference on agreement technologies (pp. 33–48). Springer

[20]

Dignum, V. (2019). Responsible artificial intelligence: How to develop and use AI in a responsible way. Springer.

[21]

Mosca, F., & Such, J. (2021). ELVIRA: An explainable agent for value and utility-driven multiuser privacy. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (AAMAS).

[22]

Fogues R, Such J, Espinosa A, and Garcia-Fornes A Bff: A tool for eliciting tie strength and user communities in social networking services Information Systems Frontiers 2014 16 2 225-237

[23]

Such J and Rovatsos M Privacy policy negotiation in social media ACM TAAS 2016 11 1 1-29

[24]

Such J and Criado N Resolving multi-party privacy conflicts in social media IEEE TKDE 2016 28 7 1851-1863

[25]

Ilia, P., Polakis, I., Athanasopoulos, E., Maggi, F., & Ioannidis, S. (2015). Face/off: Preventing privacy leakage from photos in social networks. In CCS (pp. 781–792). ACM Press

[26]

Ramokapane, K. M., Misra, G., Such, J., & Preibusch, S. (2021). Truth or dare: Understanding and predicting how users lie and provide untruthful data online. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–15).

[27]

Schwartz SH An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values Online Readings in Psychology and Culture 2012 2 1 11

[28]

Schwartz SH A proposal for measuring value orientations across nations Questionnaire Package of the European Social Survey 2003 259 290 261

[29]

Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free Press.

[30]

Bardi A and Schwartz SH Values and behavior: Strength and structure of relations Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2003 29 10 1207-1220

[31]

Atkinson K and Bench-Capon T Practical reasoning as presumptive argumentation using action based alternating transition systems Artificial Intelligence 2007 171 10–15 855-874

[32]

Atkinson K and Bench-Capon T Taking account of the actions of others in value-based reasoning Artificial Intelligence 2018 254 1-20

[33]

Chander, A., & Srinivasan, R. (2018). Evaluating explanations by cognitive value. In International cross-domain conference for machine learning and knowledge extraction (pp. 314–328). Springer

[34]

Langley, P. (2019). Explainable, normative, and justified agency. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (Vol. 33, pp. 9775–9779).

[35]

Mosca, F., Sarkadi, Ş., Such, J. M., & McBurney, P. (2020). Agent EXPRI: Licence to explain. In International workshop on explainable, transparent autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (pp. 21–38). Cham: Springer.

[36]

Tessier, C., Chaudron, L., & Müller, H.-J. (2006). Conflicting agents: Conflict management in multi-agent systems (Vol. 1). Springer.

[37]

Mancini, C., Rogers, Y., Bandara, A. K., Coe, T., Jedrzejczyk, L., Joinson, A. N., Price, B. A., Thomas, K., & Nuseibeh, B. (2010). Contravision: Exploring users’ reactions to futuristic technology. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 153–162).

[38]

Fogues R, Murukannaiah P, Such J, and Singh M Sharing policies in multiuser privacy scenarios: Incorporating context, preferences, and arguments in decision making ACM TOCHI 2017 24 1 5-1529

[39]

Hoffman, R. R., Mueller, S. T., Klein, G., & Litman, J. (2018). Metrics for explainable AI: Challenges and prospects. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.04608

[40]

Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on amazon’s mechanical turk. Behavior Research Methods,44(1), 1–23.

[41]

Peer E, Vosgerau J, and Acquisti A Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on amazon mechanical turk Behavior Research Methods 2014 46 4 1023-1031

[42]

Hauser DJ and Schwarz N Attentive turkers: Mturk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants Behavior Research Methods 2016 48 1 400-407

[43]

Paas LJ and Morren M Please do not answer if you are reading this: Respondent attention in online panels Marketing Letters 2018 29 1 13-21

[44]

Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research,15(4), 336–355.

[45]

Barabási AL and Albert R Emergence of scaling in random networks Science 1999 286 5439 509-512

[46]

Mislove, A., Marcon, M., Gummadi, K. P., Druschel, P., & Bhattacharjee, B. (2007). Measurement and analysis of online social networks. In ICM (pp. 29–42). ACM

[47]

Viswanath, B., Mislove, A., Cha, M., & Gummadi, K. P. (2009). On the evolution of user interaction in Facebook. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM workshop on online social networks (pp. 37–42). ACM.

[48]

Leskovec, J., & Mcauley, J. J. (2012). Learning to discover social circles in ego networks. In NIPS (pp. 539–547).

[49]

Terry, G., Hayfield, N., Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. In: The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 17–37). Sage.

[50]

Fogues R, Such J, Espinosa A, and Garcia-Fornes A Open challenges in relationship-based privacy mechanisms for social network services International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 2015 31 5 350-370

[51]

Johnson, M., Egelman, S., & Bellovin, S. M. (2012). Facebook and privacy: It’s complicated. In Proceedings of the eighth symposium on usable privacy and security (pp. 1–15).

[52]

Squicciarini A, Caragea C, and Balakavi R Toward automated online photo privacy ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB) 2017 11 1 1-29

[53]

Zerr, S., Siersdorfer, S., Hare, J., & Demidova, E. (2012). Privacy-aware image classification and search. In Proceedings of the 35th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (pp. 35–44).

[54]

Fogues R, Such J, Espinosa A, and Garcia-Fornes A Tie and tag: A study of tie strength and tags for photo sharing PLoS ONE 2018 13 8 1-22

[55]

Reinhardt, D., Engelmann, F., & Hollick, M. (2015). Can i help you setting your privacy? A survey-based exploration of users’ attitudes towards privacy suggestions. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on advances in mobile computing and multimedia (pp. 347–356).

[56]

Shehab, M., & Touati, H. (2012). Semi-supervised policy recommendation for online social networks. In 2012 IEEE/ACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining (pp. 360–367). IEEE

[57]

Misra, G., Such, J., & Balogun, H. (2016). Non-sharing communities? An empirical study of community detection for access control decisions. In 2016 IEEE/ACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining (ASONAM) (pp. 49–56).

[58]

Amershi, S., Fogarty, J., & Weld, D. (2012). Regroup: Interactive machine learning for on-demand group creation in social networks. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 21–30).

[59]

Misra, G., Such, J., & Balogun, H. (2016). Improve-identifying minimal profile vectors for similarity based access control. In IEEE Trustcom (pp. 868–875).

[60]

Squicciarini AC, Lin D, Sundareswaran S, and Wede J Privacy policy inference of user-uploaded images on content sharing sites IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 2014 27 1 193-206

[61]

Albertini, D. A., Carminati, B., & Ferrari, E. (2016). Privacy settings recommender for online social network. In 2016 IEEE 2nd international conference on collaboration and internet computing (CIC) (pp. 514–521). IEEE.

[62]

Li, Q., Li, J., Wang, H., & Ginjala, A. (2011). Semantics-enhanced privacy recommendation for social networking sites. In 2011 IEEE 10th international conference on trust, security and privacy in computing and communications (pp. 226–233). IEEE.

[63]

Kurtan AC and Yolum P Assisting humans in privacy management: An agent-based approach Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 2021 35 1 1-33

[64]

Kepez, B., & Yolum, P. (2016). Learning privacy rules cooperatively in online social networks. In Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on AI for privacy and security (pp. 1–4).

[65]

Misra G and Such J Pacman: Personal agent for access control in social media IEEE Internet Computing 2017 21 6 18-26

[66]

Misra, G., & Such, J. (2017). React: Recommending access control decisions to social media users. In IEEE/ACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining (ASONAM) (pp. 421–426).

[67]

Criado N and Such J Implicit contextual integrity in online social networks Information Sciences 2015 325 48-69

[68]

Ruiz-Dolz, R., Alemany, J., Heras, S., & García-Fornes, A. (2019). Automatic generation of explanations to prevent privacy violations.

[69]

Hu, H., Ahn, G. J., & Jorgensen, J. (2011). Detecting and resolving privacy conflicts for collaborative data sharing in online social networks. In ACSAC (pp. 103–112). ACM.

[70]

Zhong, H., Squicciarini, A., & Miller, D. (2018). Toward automated multiparty privacy conflict detection. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM international conference on information and knowledge management (pp. 1811–1814).

[71]

Thomas, K., Grier, C., & Nicol, D. (2010). Unfriendly: Multi-party privacy risks in social networks. In PET (pp. 236–252). Springer.

[72]

Carminati, B., & Ferrari, E. (2011). Collaborative access control in on-line social networks. In CollaborateCom (pp. 231–240). IEEE

[73]

Hu H, Ahn G-J, and Jorgensen J Multiparty access control for online social networks: Model and mechanisms IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 2012 25 7 1614-1627

[74]

Ratikan, A., & Shikida, M. (2014). Privacy protection based privacy conflict detection and solution in online social networks. In International conference on human aspects of information security, privacy, and trust (pp. 433–445). Springer.

[75]

Shetty NP, Muniyal B, and Mowla S Policy resolution of shared data in online social networks International Journal of Electrical & Computer Engineering 2020 10 3767

[76]

Akkuzu G, Aziz B, and Adda M Towards consensus-based group decision making for co-owned data sharing in online social networks IEEE Access 2020 8 91311-91325

[77]

Xu L, Jiang C, He N, Han Z, and Benslimane A Trust-based collaborative privacy management in online social networks IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 2018 14 1 48-60

[78]

Squicciarini, A., Shehab, M., & Paci, F. (2009). Collective privacy management in social networks. In WWW (pp. 521–530). ACM.

[79]

Ulusoy, O., & Yolum, P. (2020). Agents for preserving privacy: Learning and decision making collaboratively. In Multi-agent systems and agreement technologies (pp. 116–131). Springer.

[80]

Rajtmajer, S., Squicciarini, A., Griffin, C., Karumanchi, S., & Tyagi, A. (2016). Constrained social-energy minimization for multi-party sharing in online social networks. In Proceedings of the international conference on autonomous agents & multiagent systems (AAMAS) (pp. 680–688).

[81]

Rajtmajer, S., Squicciarini, A., Such, J., Semonsen, J., & Belmonte, A. (2017). An ultimatum game model for the evolution of privacy in jointly managed content. In GAMESEC (pp. 112–130). Springer.

[82]

Fogues R, Murukannaiah P, Such J, and Singh M Sosharp: Recommending sharing policies in multiuser privacy scenarios IEEE Internet Computing 2017 21 6 28-36

[83]

Ruiz-Dolz, R., Heras, S., Alemany, J., & García-Fornes, A. (2019). Towards an argumentation system for assisting users with privacy management in online social networks. In CMNA@ PERSUASIVE (pp. 17–28).

[84]

Kökciyan N, Yaglikci N, and Yolum P An argumentation approach for resolving privacy disputes in online social networks ACM TOIT 2017 17 3 27

[85]

Mester, Y., Kökciyan, N., & Yolum, P. (2015). Negotiating privacy constraints in online social networks. In International workshop on multiagent foundations of social computing (pp. 112–129). Springer.

[86]

Kekulluoglu D, Kökciyan N, and Yolum P Preserving privacy as social responsibility in online social networks ACM TOIT 2018 18 4 42

[87]

Mosca, F., Such, J., & McBurney, P. (2019). Value-driven collaborative privacy decision making. In AAAI PAL symposium.

[88]

Ajmeri, N., Guo, H., Murukannaiah, P. K., & Singh, M. P. (2020). Elessar: Ethics in norm-aware agents. In Proceedings of the international conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS) (pp. 16–24).

[89]

Calikli, G., Law, M., Bandara, A. K., Russo, A., Dickens, L., Price, B. A., Stuart, A., Levine, M., & Nuseibeh, B. (2016). Privacy dynamics: Learning privacy norms for social software. In 2016 IEEE/ACM 11th international symposium on software engineering for adaptive and self-managing systems (SEAMS) (pp. 47–56). IEEE.

[90]

Ulusoy, O., & Yolum, P. (2020). Norm-based access control. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM symposium on access control models and technologies (pp. 35–46).

[91]

Beato, F., & Peeters, R. (2014). Collaborative joint content sharing for online social networks. In 2014 IEEE international conference on pervasive computing and communication workshops (PERCOM WORKSHOPS) (pp. 616–621). IEEE.

[92]

Olteanu, A.-M., Huguenin, K., Dacosta, I., & Hubaux, J.-P. (2018). Consensual and privacy-preserving sharing of multi-subject and interdependent data. In Proceedings of the 25th network and distributed system security symposium (NDSS) (pp. 1–16). Internet Society.

[93]

Vishwamitra, N., Li, Y., Wang, K., Hu, H., Caine, K., & Ahn, G.J. (2017). Towards pii-based multiparty access control for photo sharing in online social networks. In SACMAT (pp. 155–166). ACM.

[94]

Ramokapane, K. M., Rashid, A., & Such, J. M. (2017). “I feel stupid I can’t delete…”: A study of users’ cloud deletion practices and coping strategies. In Thirteenth symposium on usable privacy and security (SOUPS 2017) (pp. 241–256).

[95]

Abdi, N., Zhan, X., Ramokapane, K. M., & Such, J. (2021). Privacy norms for smart home personal assistants. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–14).

Cited By

Serramia MCriado NLuck MDastani MSichman JAlechina NDignum V(2024)Multi-user Norm ConsensusProceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3635637.3663029(1683-1691)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3635637.3663029
Kopecka HSuch JLuck M(2024)Preferences for AI Explanations Based on Cognitive Style and Socio-Cultural FactorsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373868:CSCW1(1-32)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637386
Zhou HGoel MAgarwal Y(2024)Bring Privacy To The Table: Interactive Negotiation for Privacy Settings of Shared Sensing DevicesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642897(1-22)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642897
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

An explainable assistant for multiuser privacy

Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

Recommendations

ELVIRA: An Explainable Agent for Value and Utility-Driven Multiuser Privacy
AAMAS '21: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems

Online social networks fail to support users to adequately share co-owned content, which leads to privacy violations. Scholars proposed collaborative mechanisms to support users, but they did not satisfy one or more requirements needed according to ...
Value-Aligned and Explainable Agents for Collective Decision Making: Privacy Application
AAMAS '20: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems

Multiuser privacy (MP) is reported to cause concern among the users of online services, such as social networks, which do not support collective privacy management. In this research, informed by previous work and empirical studies in privacy, artificial ...
PACCART: Reinforcing Trust in Multiuser Privacy Agreement Systems
Coordination, Organizations, Institutions, Norms, and Ethics for Governance of Multi-Agent Systems XVI
Abstract
Collaborative systems, such as Online Social Networks and the Internet of Things, enable users to share privacy sensitive content. Content in these systems is often co-owned by multiple users with different privacy expectations, leading to ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Volume 36, Issue 1

Apr 2022

875 pages

ISSN:1387-2532

Issue’s Table of Contents

© The Author(s) 2022.

Publisher

Kluwer Academic Publishers

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 April 2022

Accepted: 24 December 2021

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

13
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 16 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Serramia MCriado NLuck MDastani MSichman JAlechina NDignum V(2024)Multi-user Norm ConsensusProceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3635637.3663029(1683-1691)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3635637.3663029
Kopecka HSuch JLuck M(2024)Preferences for AI Explanations Based on Cognitive Style and Socio-Cultural FactorsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373868:CSCW1(1-32)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637386
Zhou HGoel MAgarwal Y(2024)Bring Privacy To The Table: Interactive Negotiation for Privacy Settings of Shared Sensing DevicesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642897(1-22)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642897
Ruiz-Dolz RTaverner JHeras Barberá SGarcía-Fornes A(2024)Persuasion-enhanced computational argumentative reasoning through argumentation-based persuasive frameworksUser Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction10.1007/s11257-023-09370-134:1(229-258)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11257-023-09370-1
Ogunniye GKökciyan NAgmon NAn BRicci AYeoh W(2023)Contextual Integrity for Argumentation-based Privacy ReasoningProceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3545946.3598903(2253-2261)Online publication date: 30-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3545946.3598903
Seymour WSuch J(2023)Ignorance is Bliss? The Effect of Explanations on Perceptions of Voice AssistantsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35794977:CSCW1(1-24)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3579497
Alhelali ERamokapane KSuch J(2023)Multiuser Privacy and Security Conflicts in the CloudProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3581307(1-16)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3581307
Aycı GÖzgür AŞensoy MYolum P(2023)Can We Explain Privacy?IEEE Internet Computing10.1109/MIC.2023.327076827:4(75-80)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/MIC.2023.3270768
van Nuenen TSuch JCote M(2022)Intersectional Experiences of Unfair Treatment Caused by Automated Computational SystemsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35555466:CSCW2(1-30)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555546
Zhan XSarkadi SCriado NSuch JConitzer VTasioulas JScheutz MCalo RMara MZimmermann A(2022)A Model for Governing Information Sharing in Smart AssistantsProceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society10.1145/3514094.3534129(845-855)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3514094.3534129
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents