The paper argues that federated learning, while touted as privacy‑preserving, still concentrates control over the resulting model with the entity that orchestrates training. It identifies three layers—storage, circulation, and learning—where creative communities can exert governance, noting that current practices allow consent for training but not for model ownership or federation. The authors propose four design principles for a creative data commons that extends governance to models, ensures legibility of terms at contribution, incorporates refusal as a first‑class state, and makes stewardship transparent and accountable.
arXiv:2607. 22953v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Modern AI systems bring societal risks such as mass surveillance, extreme concentrations of power, and loss of user autonomy---calling into question a model where third-parties collect and control massive amounts of user data.
arXiv:2505. 23593v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Post-training of foundation language models has emerged as a promising research domain in federated learning (FL) with the goal to enable privacy-preserving model improvements and adaptations to user's downstream tasks.
arXiv:2606. 00947v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Foundation models are increasingly personalized on decentralized private data through federated learning and are now deployed at scale under growing regulatory requirements for post-market monitoring.
arXiv:2606. 12260v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: How can we design a market of human-generated content for use in training AI models that both enables technological progress and preserves individual incentives for high-quality content creation?
The paper introduces Federated Agent Optimization (FAO), a framework for enabling large language model agents to improve collaboratively while keeping raw data, trajectories, and private knowledge local. FAO treats agent capabilities—such as memory, tools, rewards, skills, and structured knowledge—as a multi‑objective optimization space that balances utility, privacy leakage, and communication cost. It outlines methods for abstracting, protecting, aggregating, and adapting private experience into transferable capabilities, and highlights key challenges and future research directions for trustworthy federated agent systems.
Communities often respond to potentially AI-assisted work by asking three questions: Was AI used? Was that use disclosed? Can hidden use be detected? These questions place AI use itself at the center...
arXiv:2606. 00621v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence has fundamentally changed how content is now produced.
arXiv:2606. 16891v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Federated Learning is rapidly evolving beyond the exchange of traditional model weights and gradients, yet existing definitions fail to capture the full scope of modern payloads like synthetic data and federated analytics.
The paper examines how AI involvement in human collaboration can lead to unowned judgment, where decisions shaped by AI lack a clear accountable human or institution. Through cases of AI-assisted peer review and concealed AI use in creative work, it shows that contribution dissolution weakens responsibility and that fear of losing credit can deter disclosure. The authors argue for clearer distinctions of AI roles, identification of judgments needing human ownership, and conditions that allow disclosure without penalty, aiming to make AI-shaped contributions discussable, creditable, contestable, and repairable.
arXiv:2606. 26114v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We examine the structural transformation of creative industries under generative artificial intelligence, drawing on 374 primary sources spanning policy documents, industry data, creator surveys, and platform analytics.
Cognitive Digital Twins (CDTs) are dynamic computational models that represent an individual’s cognition, continuously updated with behavioral, contextual, or physiological data to predict or simulate that person’s mental processes or act as a proxy for communication and decision‑making. The paper defines CDTs, distinguishes them from related systems, and introduces a 5A governance framework—authority, autonomy, access & control, accountability, and availability—to address their unique risks. It identifies specific threats such as misrepresentation, epistemic authority shifts, shadow twins, and proxy‑power asymmetries, and proposes governance requirements for high‑risk CDTs, including stronger consent, purpose limitation, validity, traceability, contestation, independent review, and model retirement.
arXiv:2606. 09408v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: 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.