BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Jennifer Horkoff

Jennifer Horkoff contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Software EngineeringArtificial Intelligencecs.CY

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2024arXiv

RE-centric Recommendations for the Development of Trustworthy(er) Autonomous Systems

Complying with the EU AI Act (AIA) guidelines while developing and implementing AI systems will soon be mandatory within the EU. However, practitioners lack actionable instructions to operationalise ethics during AI systems development. A literature review of different ethical guidelines revealed inconsistencies in the principles addressed and the terminology used to describe them. Furthermore, requirements engineering (RE), which is identified to foster trustworthiness in the AI development process from the early stages was observed to be absent in a lot of frameworks that support the development of ethical and trustworthy AI. This incongruous phrasing combined with a lack of concrete development practices makes trustworthy AI development harder. To address this concern, we formulated a comparison table for the terminology used and the coverage of the ethical AI principles in major ethical AI guidelines. We then examined the applicability of ethical AI development frameworks for performing effective RE during the development of trustworthy AI systems. A tertiary review and meta-analysis of literature discussing ethical AI frameworks revealed their limitations when developing trustworthy AI. Based on our findings, we propose recommendations to address such limitations during the development of trustworthy AI.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Non-Functional Requirements for Machine Learning: An Exploration of System Scope and Interest

Systems that rely on Machine Learning (ML systems) have differing demands on system quality compared to traditional systems. Such quality demands, known as non-functional requirements (NFRs), may differ in their definition, scope, and importance from NFRs for traditional systems. Despite the importance of NFRs for ML systems, our understanding of their definitions and scope -- and of the extent of existing research in each NFR -- is lacking compared to our understanding in traditional domains. Building on an investigation into importance and treatment of ML system NFRs in industry, we make three contributions towards narrowing this gap: (1) we present clusters of ML system NFRs based on shared characteristics, (2) we use Scopus search results -- as well as inter-coder reliability on a sample of NFRs -- to estimate the number of relevant studies on a subset of the NFRs, and (3), we use our initial reading of titles and abstracts in each sample to define the scope of NFRs over parts of the system (e.g., training data, ML model, or other system elements). These initial findings form the groundwork for future research in this emerging domain.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Charting Coordination Needs in Large-Scale Agile Organisationswith Boundary Objects and Methodological Islands

Large-scale system development companies are increasingly adopting agile methods. While this adoption may improve lead-times, such companies need to balance two trade-offs: (i) the need to have a uniform, consistent development method on system level with the need for specialised methods for teams in different disciplines(e.g., hardware, software, mechanics, sales, support); (ii) the need for comprehensive documentation on system level with the need to have lightweight documentation enabling iterative and agile work. With specialised methods for teams, isolated teams work within larger ecosystems of plan-driven culture, i.e., teams become agile "islands". At the boundaries, these teams share knowledge which needs to be managed well for a correct system to be developed. While it is useful to support diverse and specialised methods, it is important to understand which islands are repeatedly encountered, the reasons or factors triggering their existence, and how best to handle coordination between them. Based on a multiple case study, this work presents a catalogue of islands and the boundary objects between them. We believe this work will be beneficial to practitioners aiming to understand their ecosystems and researchers addressing communication and coordination challenges in large-scale development.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Modeling and Analysis of Boundary Objects and Methodological Islands in Large-Scale Systems Development

Large-scale companies commonly face the challenge of managing relevant knowledge between different organizational groups, particularly in increasingly agile contexts. In previous studies, we found the importance of analyzing methodological islands (i.e., groups using different development methods than the surrounding organization) and boundary objects between them. In this paper, we propose a metamodel to better capture and analyze coordination and knowledge management in practice. Such a metamodel can allow practitioners to describe current practices, analyze issues, and design better-suited coordination mechanisms. We evaluated the conceptual model together with four large-scale companies developing complex systems. In particular, we derived an initial list of bad smells that can be leveraged to detect issues and devise suitable improvement strategies for inter-team coordination in large-scale development. We present the model, smells, and our evaluation results.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access