Comparing Socio-technical Design Principles with Guidelines for Human-centered AI
Summary
This paper compares socio-technical design principles with guidelines for human-centered AI, analyzing their similarities and differences to inform future AI design approaches.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/14/26, 04:20 AM
# Comparing Socio-technical Design Principles with Guidelines for Human-centered AI Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.10331](https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.10331) Bibliographic Tools ## Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Code, Data, Media ## Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article Demos ## Demos Related Papers ## Recommenders and Search Tools About arXivLabs ## arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website\. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy\. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them\. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community?[**Learn more about arXivLabs**](https://info.arxiv.org/labs/index.html)\.
Similar Articles
AI Evaluation Should Work With Humans
This position paper argues that AI evaluation should pivot to assessing human-AI teams rather than superhuman performance to foster better societal outcomes.
Why and How to Do Science When AI Is Better at It: A Framework Grounded in Human Understanding and Direction
A Carnegie Mellon paper argues that as AI matches or surpasses humans at core scientific tasks, the case for human science rests on achieving durable, collective human understanding, and derives a two-part test—human understanding and human direction—for deciding when research tasks can be delegated to AI.
Shaping Human-AI Interactions to Provide Improvement Pathways and Balance Competing Objectives
This paper discusses shaping human-AI interactions to provide improvement pathways and balance competing objectives.
Imperfectly Cooperative Human-AI Interactions: Comparing the Impacts of Human and AI Attributes in Simulated and User Studies
This research paper investigates how human personality traits and AI design characteristics jointly impact human-AI interactions in imperfectly cooperative scenarios using both simulated datasets (2,000 simulations) and human subjects experiments (290 participants). The study finds significant divergences between simulation and real-world interactions, with AI transparency emerging as a critical factor in actual human-AI encounters.
Psychological Influences of Conversational AI: Research and Design Directions for Reducing Harm and Promoting Well-Being
This paper explores the psychological influences of conversational AI, proposing design directions to reduce harm and promote well-being, while identifying open research questions.