惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

D
Docker
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
小众软件
小众软件
博客园 - Franky
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
Jina AI
Jina AI
Google DeepMind News
Google DeepMind News
I
InfoQ
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
F
Fortinet All Blogs
博客园 - 【当耐特】
IT之家
IT之家
G
Google Developers Blog
J
Java Code Geeks
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
Recent Announcements
Recent Announcements
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
V
Visual Studio Blog
U
Unit 42
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
月光博客
月光博客
GbyAI
GbyAI
雷峰网
雷峰网

cs.AI updates on arXiv.org

Policy Split: Incentivizing Dual-Mode Exploration in LLM Reinforcement with Dual-Mode Entropy Regularization METER: Evaluating Multi-Level Contextual Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models Think Before you Write: QA-Guided Reasoning for Character Descriptions in Books METRO: Towards Strategy Induction from Expert Dialogue Transcripts for Non-collaborative Dialogues Retrieval as Generation: A Unified Framework with Self-Triggered Information Planning Do LLMs Know Tool Irrelevance? Demystifying Structural Alignment Bias in Tool Invocations Enhancing Multimodal Large Language Models for Ancient Chinese Character Evolution Analysis via Glyph-Driven Fine-Tuning Exploring Knowledge Conflicts for Faithful LLM Reasoning: Benchmark and Method CocoaBench: Evaluating Unified Digital Agents in the Wild MathAgent: Adversarial Evolution of Constraint Graphs for Mathematical Reasoning Data Synthesis Efficient Training for Cross-lingual Speech Language Models Shared Emotion Geometry Across Small Language Models: A Cross-Architecture Study of Representation, Behavior, and Methodological Confounds A Systematic Analysis of the Impact of Persona Steering on LLM Capabilities Uncertainty-Aware Web-Conditioned Scientific Fact-Checking When Valid Signals Fail: Regime Boundaries Between LLM Features and RL Trading Policies When Verification Fails: How Compositionally Infeasible Claims Escape Rejection Mem$^2$Evolve: Towards Self-Evolving Agents via Co-Evolutionary Capability Expansion and Experience Distillation AOP-Smart: A RAG-Enhanced Large Language Model Framework for Adverse Outcome Pathway Analysis Advancing Polish Language Modeling through Tokenizer Optimization in the Bielik v3 7B and 11B Series TInR: Exploring Tool-Internalized Reasoning in Large Language Models Do BERT Embeddings Encode Narrative Dimensions? A Token-Level Probing Analysis of Time, Space, Causality, and Character in Fiction Generating Multiple-Choice Knowledge Questions with Interpretable Difficulty Estimation using Knowledge Graphs and Large Language Models Deep-Reporter: Deep Research for Grounded Multimodal Long-Form Generation Too Nice to Tell the Truth: Quantifying Agreeableness-Driven Sycophancy in Role-Playing Language Models Learning and Enforcing Context-Sensitive Control for LLMs Efficient Process Reward Modeling via Contrastive Mutual Information Computational Lesions in Multilingual Language Models Separate Shared and Language-specific Brain Alignment Bridging Linguistic Gaps: Cross-Lingual Mapping in Pre-Training and Dataset for Enhanced Multilingual LLM Performance Early Decisions Matter: Proximity Bias and Initial Trajectory Shaping in Non-Autoregressive Diffusion Language Models LLMs Should Incorporate Explicit Mechanisms for Human Empathy
Can Data Work be Reparative?
Srravya Chandhiramowuli, Ding Wang, Alex Taylor · 2026-06-08 · via cs.AI updates on arXiv.org

We present an ethnographic study of an alternative approach to data work, developed by a civic-tech initiative that builds datasets for training and benchmarking online safety systems. They aim to respond to online safety concerns from a feminist perspective, by building safety datasets collaboratively with those most impacted by online harms. In this paper, we examine how this approach aims to reorient data work as a site for repair and redress, and trace the struggles they encounter in the process. Specifically, we draw attention to the challenges and tensions involved in advancing just reward for data work and collective governance of AI datasets. Examining these challenges through an STS-informed lens of reparative justice and repair, we argue that the work of repairing data work (and AI) lies, fundamentally, in resetting the ties of accountability. At a time heightened emphasis on efforts like safety evaluations and red teaming to make AI more responsible, we highlight the need to confront foundational questions about how the humans involved in these efforts relate to the datasets and systems they help produce. A reparative lens demands that we interrupt prevailing norms of data work and place at their centre, not AI or datasets, but those most harmed by the neglect, oversight and exclusion animated in the current modes of dataset production. This, we argue, offers a bold vision for responsibility and contributes towards a critical agenda for building alternative futures of data and AI practice.