Current definitions of Information Science are inadequate to comprehensively describe the nature of its field of study and for addressing the problems that are arising from intelligent technologies. The ubiquitous rise of artificial intelligence applications and their impact on society demands the field of Information Science acknowledge the socio-technical nature of these technologies. Previous definitions of Information Science over the last six decades have inadequately addressed the environmental, human, and social aspects of these technologies. This perspective piece advocates for an expanded definition of Information Science that fully includes the socio-technical impacts information has on the conduct of research in this field. Proposing an expanded definition of Information Science that includes the socio-technical aspects of this field should stimulate both conversation and widen the interdisciplinary lens necessary to address how intelligent technologies may be incorporated into society and our lives more fairly.

Using Large Language Models (LLMs) to address critical societal problems requires adopting this novel technology into socio-technical systems. However, the complexity of such systems and the nature of LLMs challenge such a vision. It is unlikely that the solution to such challenges will come from the Artificial Intelligence (AI) community itself. Instead, the Systems Engineering approach is better equipped to facilitate the adoption of LLMs by prioritising the problems and their context before any other aspects. This paper introduces the challenges LLMs generate and surveys systems research efforts for engineering AI-based systems. We reveal how the systems engineering principles have supported addressing similar issues to the ones LLMs pose and discuss our findings to provide future directions for adopting LLMs.

Socio-technical networks represent emerging cyber-physical infrastructures that are tightly interwoven with human networks. The coupling between human and technical networks presents significant challenges in managing, controlling, and securing these complex, interdependent systems. This paper investigates game-theoretic frameworks for the design and control of socio-technical networks, with a focus on critical applications such as misinformation management, infrastructure optimization, and resilience in socio-cyber-physical systems (SCPS). Core methodologies, including Stackelberg games, mechanism design, and dynamic game theory, are examined as powerful tools for modeling interactions in hierarchical, multi-agent environments. Key challenges addressed include mitigating human-driven vulnerabilities, managing large-scale system dynamics, and countering adversarial threats. By bridging individual agent behaviors with overarching system goals, this work illustrates how the integration of game theory and control theory can lead to robust, resilient, and adaptive socio-technical networks. This paper highlights the potential of these frameworks to dynamically align decentralized agent actions with system-wide objectives of stability, security, and efficiency.

Hosted by Ben Byford, The Machine Ethics Podcast brings together interviews with academics, authors, business leaders, designers and engineers on the subject of autonomous algorithms, artificial intelligence, machine learning, and technology's impact on society. In this episode we're chatting to Lisa about: Data and AI literacy, data sharing, data governance and data wallets, design values, selling in ethics to organisations, contractual agreements and ethical frameworks, AI unlearning, what organisations needs to know about ethics, and an AI ethics consultant directory… Lisa Talia Moretti is a Digital Sociologist based in the UK. She holds a MSc Digital Sociology and 17 years of experience working at the intersection of design research, social theory and technology. Lisa is the Chair of the AI Council at BIMA and a board member of the Conversation Design Institute Foundation. In 2020, Lisa was named one of Britain's 100 people who are shaping the digital industry in the category Champion for Change.

Community resilience is a complex and muti-faceted phenomenon that emerges from complex and nonlinear interactions among different socio-technical systems and their resilience properties. However, present studies on community resilience focus primarily on vulnerability assessment and utilize index-based approaches, with limited ability to capture heterogeneous features within community socio-technical systems and their nonlinear interactions in shaping robustness, redundancy, and resourcefulness components of resilience. To address this gap, this paper presents an integrated three-layer deep learning model for community resilience rating (called Resili-Net). Twelve measurable resilience features are specified and computed within community socio-technical systems (i.e., facilities, infrastructures, and society) related to three resilience components of robustness, redundancy, and resourcefulness. Using publicly accessible data from multiple metropolitan statistical areas in the United States, Resili-Net characterizes the resilience levels of spatial areas into five distinct levels. The interpretability of the model outcomes enables feature analysis for specifying the determinants of resilience in areas within each resilience level, allowing for the identification of specific resilience enhancement strategies. Changes in community resilience profiles under urban development patterns are further examined by changing the value of related socio-technical systems features. Accordingly, the outcomes provide novel perspectives for community resilience assessment by harnessing machine intelligence and heterogeneous urban big data.

Concerns about ethics of AI are older than AI itself. The phrase "artificial intelligence" was first used by McCarthy and colleagues in 1955 (McCarthy et al. 1955). However, in 1920 Capek already had published his science fiction play in which robots suffering abuse rebelled against human tyranny (Capek 1920), and by 1942, Asimov had proposed his famous three "laws of robotics" about robots not harming humans, not harming other robots, and not harming themselves (Asimov 1942). During much of the last century, when AI was mostly confined to research laboratories, concerns about ethics of AI were mostly limited to futurist writers of fiction and fantasy. In this century, as AI has begun to penetrate almost all aspects of life, worries about AI ethics have started permeating mainstream media.

It is needless to mention the (already established) overarching importance of knowledge organization and its tried-and-tested high-quality schemes in knowledge-based Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems. But equally, it is also hard to ignore that, increasingly, standalone KOSs are becoming functionally ineffective components for such systems, given their inability to capture the continuous facetization and drift of domains. The paper proposes a radical re-conceptualization of KOSs as a first step to solve such an inability, and, accordingly, contributes in the form of the following dimensions: (i) an explicit characterization of Knowledge Organization Ecosystems (KOEs) (possibly for the first time) and their positioning as pivotal components in realizing sustainable knowledge-based AI solutions, (ii) as a consequence of such a novel characterization, a first examination and characterization of KOEs as Socio-Technical Systems (STSs), thus opening up an entirely new stream of research in knowledge-based AI, and (iii) motivating KOEs not to be mere STSs but STSs which are grounded in Ethics and Responsible Artificial Intelligence cardinals from their very genesis. The paper grounds the above contributions in relevant research literature in a distributed fashion throughout the paper, and finally concludes by outlining the future research possibilities.

When discussing future concerns within socio-technical systems in work contexts, we often find descriptions of missed technology development and integration. The experience of technology that fails whilst being integrated is often rooted in dysfunctional epistemological approaches within the research and development process. Thus, ultimately leading to sustainable technology-distrust in work contexts. This is true for organisations which integrate new technologies and for organisations that invent them. Organisations in which we find failed technology development and integrations are in their very nature social systems. Nowadays, those complex social systems act within an even more complex environment. This urges for new anticipation methods for technology development and integration. Gathering of and dealing with complex information in the described context is what we call Anticipation Next. This explorative work uses existing literature from the adjoining research fields of system theory, organizational theory, and socio-technical research to combine various concepts. We end with suggesting a conceptual framework that is supposed to be used in very early stages of technology development and integration for and in work contexts.