This report investigates the perceptions of teaching staff on the prevalence of student cheating and the impact of Generative AI on academic integrity. Data was collected via an anonymous survey of teachers at the Department of Information Technology at Uppsala University and analyzed alongside institutional statistics on cheating investigations from 2004 to 2023. The results indicate that while teachers generally do not view cheating as highly prevalent, there is a strong belief that its incidence is increasing, potentially due to the accessibility of Generative AI. Most teachers do not equate AI usage with cheating but acknowledge its widespread use among students. Furthermore, teachers' perceptions align with objective data on cheating trends, highlighting their awareness of the evolving landscape of academic dishonesty.

A hot topic of Artificial Intelligence right now is image generation from prompts. DALL-E 2 is one of the biggest names in this domain, as it allows people to create images from simple text inputs, to even more complicated ones. The company that made this possible, OpenAI, has assured everyone that visited their website that "Our mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all humanity". A noble idea in our opinion, that also stood as the motive behind us choosing this subject. This paper analyzes the ethical implications of an AI image generative system, with an emphasis on how society is responding to it, how it probably will and how it should if all the right measures are taken.

Applications of Generative AI (Gen AI) are expected to revolutionize a number of different areas, ranging from science & medicine to education. The potential for these seismic changes has triggered a lively debate about the potential risks of the technology, and resulted in calls for tighter regulation, in particular from some of the major tech companies who are leading in AI development. This regulation is likely to put at risk the budding field of open-source generative AI. Using a three-stage framework for Gen AI development (near, mid and long-term), we analyze the risks and opportunities of open-source generative AI models with similar capabilities to the ones currently available (near to mid-term) and with greater capabilities (long-term). We argue that, overall, the benefits of open-source Gen AI outweigh its risks. As such, we encourage the open sourcing of models, training and evaluation data, and provide a set of recommendations and best practices for managing risks associated with open-source generative AI.

Data selection has emerged as a core issue for large-scale visual-language model pretaining (e.g., CLIP), particularly with noisy web-curated datasets. Three main data selection approaches are: (1) leveraging external non-CLIP models to aid data selection, (2) training new CLIP-style embedding models that are more effective at selecting high-quality data than the original OpenAI CLIP model, and (3) designing better metrics or strategies universally applicable to any CLIP embedding without requiring specific model properties (e.g., CLIPScore is one popular metric). While the first two approaches have been extensively studied, the third remains under-explored. In this paper, we advance the third approach by proposing two new methods. Firstly, instead of classical CLIP scores that only consider the alignment between two modalities from a single sample, we introduce negCLIPLoss, a CLIP loss-inspired method that adds the alignment between one sample and its contrastive pairs as an extra normalization term for better quality measurement. Secondly, when downstream tasks are known, we propose a new norm-based metric, NormSim, to measure the similarity between pretraining data and target data. We test our methods on the data selection benchmark, DataComp~\cite{gadre2023datacomp}. Compared to the best baseline using only OpenAI's CLIP-L/14, our methods achieve a 5.3\% improvement on ImageNet-1k and a 2.8\% improvement on 38 downstream evaluation tasks. Moreover, both negCLIPLoss and NormSim are compatible with existing techniques. By combining our methods with the current best methods DFN~\cite{fang2023data} and HYPE~\cite{kim2024hype}, we can boost average performance on downstream tasks by 0.9\%, achieving a new state-of-the-art.

The digital transformation of modern cities by integrating advanced information, communication, and computing technologies has marked the epoch of data-driven smart city applications for efficient and sustainable urban management. Despite their effectiveness, these applications often rely on massive amounts of high-dimensional and multi-domain data for monitoring and characterizing different urban sub-systems, presenting challenges in application areas that are limited by data quality and availability, as well as costly efforts for generating urban scenarios and design alternatives. As an emerging research area in deep learning, Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) models have demonstrated their unique values in data and code generation. This survey paper aims to explore the innovative integration of generative AI techniques and urban digital twins to address challenges in the realm of smart cities in various urban sectors, such as transportation and mobility management, energy system operations, building and infrastructure management, and urban design. The survey starts with the introduction of popular generative AI models with their application areas, followed by a structured review of the existing urban science applications that leverage the autonomous capability of the generative AI techniques to facilitate (a) data augmentation for promoting urban monitoring and predictive analytics, (b) synthetic data and scenario generation, (c) automated 3D city modeling, and (d) generative urban design and optimization. Based on the review, this survey discusses potential opportunities and technical strategies that integrate generative AI models into the next-generation urban digital twins for more reliable, scalable, and automated management of smart cities.

Growing interest and investment in the capabilities of foundation models has positioned such systems to impact a wide array of public services. Alongside these opportunities is the risk that these systems reify existing power imbalances and cause disproportionate harm to marginalized communities. Participatory approaches hold promise to instead lend agency and decision-making power to marginalized stakeholders. But existing approaches in participatory AI/ML are typically deeply grounded in context - how do we apply these approaches to foundation models, which are, by design, disconnected from context? Our paper interrogates this question. First, we examine existing attempts at incorporating participation into foundation models. We highlight the tension between participation and scale, demonstrating that it is intractable for impacted communities to meaningfully shape a foundation model that is intended to be universally applicable. In response, we develop a blueprint for participatory foundation models that identifies more local, application-oriented opportunities for meaningful participation. In addition to the "foundation" layer, our framework proposes the "subfloor'' layer, in which stakeholders develop shared technical infrastructure, norms and governance for a grounded domain, and the "surface'' layer, in which affected communities shape the use of a foundation model for a specific downstream task. The intermediate "subfloor'' layer scopes the range of potential harms to consider, and affords communities more concrete avenues for deliberation and intervention. At the same time, it avoids duplicative effort by scaling input across relevant use cases. Through three case studies in clinical care, financial services, and journalism, we illustrate how this multi-layer model can create more meaningful opportunities for participation than solely intervening at the foundation layer.

Helen Toner, one of OpenAI's former board members who was responsible for firing CEO Sam Altman last year, revealed that the company's board didn't know about the launch of ChatGPT until it was released in November 2022. "[The] board was not informed in advance of that," Toner said on Tuesday on a podcast called The Ted AI Show. "We learned about ChatGPT on Twitter." Toner's comments came just two days after criticized the way OpenAI was governed in an Economist piece published on Sunday that she co-wrote with Tasha McCauley, another former OpenAI board member. This is the first time that Toner has spoken openly about the circumstances that led to Altman's dramatic ouster from the company he co-founded in 2015, and his quick reinstatement following protests from employees.

In a statement released on its website, OpenAI said this new model, which would replace GPT-4 technology, will bring the company closer to achieving "AGI," or artificial general intelligence, a hotly contested idea that refers to computers matching the power of human brains.

This is not just a prediction. A few successful companies have begun to publicly experiment with the notion of an A.I. leader, even if at the moment it might largely be a branding exercise. A.I. has been hyped as the solution to all corporate problems for about 18 months now, ever since OpenAI rolled out ChatGPT in November 2022. Silicon Valley put 29 billion last year into generative A.I. and is selling it hard. Even in its current rudimentary form, A.I. that mimics human reasoning is finding a foothold among distressed companies with little to lose and lacking strong leadership.

OpenAI has created a new Safety and Security Committee less than two weeks after the company dissolved the team tasked with protecting humanity from AI's existential threats. This latest iteration of the group responsible for OpenAI's safety guardrails will include two board members and CEO Sam Altman, raising questions about whether the move is little more than self-policing theatre amid a breakneck race for profit and dominance alongside partner Microsoft. The Safety and Security Committee, formed by OpenAI's board, will be led by board members Bret Taylor (Chair), Nicole Seligman, Adam D'Angelo and Sam Altman (CEO). The new team follows co-founder Ilya Sutskever's and Jan Leike's high-profile resignations, which raised more than a few eyebrows. Their former "Superalignment Team" was only created last July.