Problem Solving Through Human–AI Preference-Based Cooperation

In today's dynamic and competitive oil and gas industry, the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a game-changer, offering unparalleled opportunities for optimization, cost reduction, and operational excellence. The main objective of autonomous operations is to minimize manual interactions and maximize self-directed plant operations. ADNOC Onshore has implemented generative AI agents in daily maintenance and production operations to boost workforce productivity in the journey of achieving autonomous operations. This paper explains the use cases, challenges, AI architecture & data security in deployment. Natural language understanding comprises a wide range of diverse tasks such as textual entailment, question answering, semantic similarity assessment, and document classification. GPT-4 Turbo is a large multimodal model (accepting text or image inputs and generating text) that can solve difficult problems with greater accuracy and advanced reasoning capabilities. The scope includes empowering reliability, maintenance, and operations professionals to draw insights from equipment manuals, asset operating manuals and operating procedures, maintenance records, and safety & integrity manuals. This in-house solution with support across structured and unstructured data, an LLM-agnostic architecture, deterministic responses with source references, and granular access controls. The solution has been integrated ERP SAP system and sensor time series PI system, data historians for integrated context. A unique automated contextualization engine has been used based on oil and gas specific vocabulary to bring context to their operations. A conversational interactive agent has been built for user interactions. The maintenance and operations engineer can receive suggestions on the proper steps to identify the root cause based on OEM product manuals, previous events, and current performance. This Generative AI solution accelerates time to insight for operators by equipping teams to streamline maintenance operations and Investigate maintenance records with generative AI to troubleshoot operations challenges more efficiently. The internal study showed that operational productivity has increased by 20% after this solution's implementation. For the model to understand industrial environments, it would require retraining the model on industrial data. Using existing models on uncontextualized, unstructured industrial data significantly increases the risk of incorrect and untrustworthy answers – referred to as AI hallucinations. Another significant challenge lies in the dependence on the quality and quantity of available data for training. AI models require extensive and representative datasets to produce accurate and reliable predictions. Large language models are a type of artificial intelligence (AI) model designed to understand and generate human language. These models are built upon deep learning architectures, particularly transformer architectures. Generative AI can play a significant role in oil and gas asset operations towards the goal of achieving autonomous operations.

Qualitative methods are incredibly beneficial to the dissemination and implementation of new digital health interventions; however, these methods can be time intensive and slow down dissemination when timely knowledge from the data sources is needed in ever-changing health systems. Recent advancements in generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and their underlying large language models (LLMs) may provide a promising opportunity to expedite the qualitative analysis of textual data, but their efficacy and reliability remain unknown. The primary objectives of our study were to evaluate the consistency in themes, reliability of coding, and time needed for inductive and deductive thematic analyses between GenAI (ie, ChatGPT and Bard) and human coders. The qualitative data for this study consisted of 40 brief SMS text message reminder prompts used in a digital health intervention for promoting antiretroviral medication adherence among people with HIV who use methamphetamine. Inductive and deductive thematic analyses of these SMS text messages were conducted by 2 independent teams of human coders. An independent human analyst conducted analyses following both approaches using ChatGPT and Bard. The consistency in themes (or the extent to which the themes were the same) and reliability (or agreement in coding of themes) between methods were compared. The themes generated by GenAI (both ChatGPT and Bard) were consistent with 71% (5/7) of the themes identified by human analysts following inductive thematic analysis. The consistency in themes was lower between humans and GenAI following a deductive thematic analysis procedure (ChatGPT: 6/12, 50%; Bard: 7/12, 58%). The percentage agreement (or intercoder reliability) for these congruent themes between human coders and GenAI ranged from fair to moderate (ChatGPT, inductive: 31/66, 47%; ChatGPT, deductive: 22/59, 37%; Bard, inductive: 20/54, 37%; Bard, deductive: 21/58, 36%). In general, ChatGPT and Bard performed similarly to each other across both types of qualitative analyses in terms of consistency of themes (inductive: 6/6, 100%; deductive: 5/6, 83%) and reliability of coding (inductive: 23/62, 37%; deductive: 22/47, 47%). On average, GenAI required significantly less overall time than human coders when conducting qualitative analysis (20, SD 3.5 min vs 567, SD 106.5 min). The promising consistency in the themes generated by human coders and GenAI suggests that these technologies hold promise in reducing the resource intensiveness of qualitative thematic analysis; however, the relatively lower reliability in coding between them suggests that hybrid approaches are necessary. Human coders appeared to be better than GenAI at identifying nuanced and interpretative themes. Future studies should consider how these powerful technologies can be best used in collaboration with human coders to improve the efficiency of qualitative research in hybrid approaches while also mitigating potential ethical risks that they may pose.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly transforming the landscape of higher education, offering novel opportunities for personalised learning and innovative assessment methods. This paper explores the dual-edged nature of GenAI's integration into educational practices, focusing on both its potential to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes and the significant challenges it poses to academic integrity and equity. Through a comprehensive review of current literature, we examine the implications of GenAI on assessment practices, highlighting the need for robust ethical frameworks to guide its use. Our analysis is framed within pedagogical theories, including social constructivism and competency-based learning, highlighting the importance of balancing human expertise and AI capabilities. We also address broader ethical concerns associated with GenAI, such as the risks of bias, the digital divide, and the environmental impact of AI technologies. This paper argues that while GenAI can provide substantial benefits in terms of automation and efficiency, its integration must be managed with care to avoid undermining the authenticity of student work and exacerbating existing inequalities. Finally, we propose a set of recommendations for educational institutions, including developing GenAI literacy programmes, revising assessment designs to incorporate critical thinking and creativity, and establishing transparent policies that ensure fairness and accountability in GenAI use. By fostering a responsible approach to GenAI, higher education can harness its potential while safeguarding the core values of academic integrity and inclusive education.

How Can <i>IJDS</i> Authors, Reviewers, and Editors Use (and Misuse) Generative AI?

during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).

Artificial Intelligence has become a focal point of interest across various sectors due to its ability to generate creative and realistic outputs. A specific subset, generative artificial intelligence, has seen significant growth, particularly in late 2022. Tools like ChatGPT, Dall-E, or Midjourney have democratized access to Large Language Models, enabling the creation of human-like content. However, the concept 'Generative Artificial Intelligence lacks a universally accepted definition, leading to potential misunderstandings. While a model that produces any output can be technically seen as generative, the Artificial Intelligent research community often reserves the term for complex models that generate high-quality, human-like material. This paper presents a literature mapping of AI-driven content generation, analyzing 631 solutions published over the last five years to better understand and characterize the Generative Artificial Intelligence landscape. Our findings suggest a dichotomy in the understanding and application of the term "Generative AI". While the broader public often interprets "Generative AI" as AI-driven creation of tangible content, the AI research community mainly discusses generative implementations with an emphasis on the models in use, without explicitly categorizing their work under the term "Generative AI".

Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy

Identifying highly correlated determinants influencing student nurses' behavioral intention of using generative artificial intelligence (Generative AI): A network analysis.

While industry practices evolve rapidly, marketing education in Australia and New Zealand faces challenges in keeping pace, particularly regarding the adoption of current marketing technologies (Harrigan et al., 2022). Generative AI, exemplified by systems like ChatGPT and DALL·E, has demonstrated benefits for learning (Baidoo-Anu &amp; Ansah, 2023). However, despite its potential, there remains a dearth of practical guidance on effectively incorporating these technologies into marketing courses. This gap persists even as general frameworks for responsible and ethical AI use, such as the Australian Framework for Generative AI in Schools (2023), emerge. As the demand for graduates with generative AI skills grows in the job market, educators must explore innovative pedagogical approaches to bridge this gap. This academic poster presents an innovative application of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in the context of teaching digital marketing at the postgraduate level. Its purpose is to bridge the gap between academic theory and industry practice by encouraging educators to integrate AI tools into their curriculum through experiential learning pedagogy (Kolb, 2014), characterized by a learning process whereby knowledge is created through hands-on experiences. The poster exemplifies how various types of GenAI technologies — specifically text-based, image-based, and video-based — can enhance teaching content, tutorial exercises, and assessments within the digital marketing course. The poster showcases examples of how these GenAI tools are integrated in the course content, to guide students in generating innovative ideas for using AI in marketing to gain a competitive edge: Text-based GenAI: Tools like ChatGPT and Gemini can automatically generate search keywords for search engine marketing. By integrating text-based GenAI tools with established marketing technology (MarTech) tools such as Google Ads and Google Ads Keyword Planner, students engage in practical exercises that combine AI-generated initial ideas (e.g., search keywords) with further analysis (e.g., search volume, click-through rates, and bidding costs) using established MarTech tools. This hands-on approach enhances their learning experience and prepares them for real-world applications. Image-based GenAI: Platforms such as DALL·E, Midjourney, and Stable Diffusion enable the creation of custom images for display advertising, enhancing visual communication in marketing materials. Through experiential learning activities, students can explore ideas, seek unusual combinations, and inspire creativity faster with image-based GenAI tools, resulting in a greater variety of display ad materials. Video-based GenAI: Applications like Sora and Synthesia facilitate the production of short video clips suitable for social media marketing (e.g., YouTube Shorts, TikTok). By engaging in dynamic content creation exercises, students learn to streamline content creation, reduce manual work, and save both time and budget, thereby gaining practical skills in social media marketing. By incorporating these GenAI technologies through experiential learning pedagogy, educators can enrich the learning experience, foster critical thinking, and prepare students for the evolving landscape of digital marketing. Future research can study the use of GenAI in marketing education using theoretical frameworks such as the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (Venkatesh et al., 2016).

Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) created a whirlwind in late 2022 and emerged as a transformative technology with the potential to revolutionize various industries, including design. Its feasibility and applicability have been extensively explored and studied by scholars. Previous research has investigated the potential of AI in different domains, such as aiding data collection and analysis or serving as a source of creative inspiration. Many design practitioners have also begun utilizing GAI as a design tool, stimulating creativity, integrating data more rapidly, and facilitating iterative design processes. However, excessive reliance on GAI in design may lead to losing the uniqueness emphasized in the field and raise concerns regarding ethical implications, biased information, user acceptance, and the preservation of human-centered approaches. Therefore, this study employs the double-diamond design process model as a framework to examine the impact of GAI on the design process. The double diamond model comprises four distinct stages: discover, define, develop, and deliver, highlighting the crucial interplay between divergence, convergence, and iteration. This research focuses on GAI applications' integration, timing, and challenges within these stages.A qualitative approach is adopted in this study to comprehensively explore the potential functionalities and limitations of generative AI at each stage of the design process. Firstly, we conducted an extensive literature review of recent advancements and technological innovations in generative artificial intelligence. Subsequently, we participated in lectures and workshops and invited experts from various domains to gather insights into the functionality and impact of generative AI. Later, we interviewed design professionals experienced in utilizing generative AI in their workflow. Data triangulation and complementary methods like focus groups are employed for data analysis to ensure robustness and reliability in the findings related to the functionality of generative AI.The findings of this study demonstrate that generative AI holds significant potential for optimizing the design process. In the discovery stage, generative AI can assist designers in generating diverse ideas and concepts. During the definition stage, generative AI aids in data analysis and user research, providing valuable insights to designers, such as engaging in ideation by addressing "How might we" questions, thereby enhancing decision-making quality. In the development stage, generative AI enables designers to rapidly explore and refine design solutions. Lastly, in the delivery stage, generative AI can help generate design concept documentation and produce rendered design visuals, enhancing the efficiency of iterative processes.This study contributes to a better understanding of how generative artificial intelligence can reshape the existing framework of the design process and provides practical insights and recommendations for contemporary and future designers.

The problem of controlling an artificial general intelligence (AGI) has fascinated both scientists and science-fiction writers for centuries. Today that problem is becoming more important because the time when we may have a superhuman intelligence among us is within the foreseeable future. Current average estimates place that moment to before 2060. Some estimates place it as early as 2040, which is quite soon. The arrival of the first AGI might lead to a series of events that we have not seen before: rapid development of an even more powerful AGI developed by the AGIs themselves. This has wide-ranging implications to the society and therefore it is something that must be studied well before it happens. In this paper we will discuss the problem of limiting the risks posed by the advent of AGIs. In a thought experiment, we propose an AGI which has enough human-like properties to act in a democratic society, while still retaining its essential artificial general intelligence properties. We discuss ways of arranging the co-existence of humans and such AGIs using a democratic system of coordination and coexistence. If considered a success, such a system could be used to manage a society consisting of both AGIs and humans. The democratic system where each member of the society is represented in the highest level of decision-making guarantees that even minorities would be able to have their voices heard. The unpredictability of the AGI era makes it necessary to consider the possibility that a population of autonomous AGIs could make us humans into a minority.

This research investigates the transformative potential of Mixture of Experts (MoE) and multimodal learning within generative AI, exploring their roles in advancing towards Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). By leveraging a combination of specialized models, MoE addresses scalability and computational limitations, enabling more nuanced and robust modelling across diverse data modalities. The research exploration draws inspiration from pioneering projects like Google's Gemini and OpenAI's anticipated Q* to push the boundaries of AI capabilities. The objectives include exploring the impact of MoE on generative AI, investigating multimodal learning's role in achieving AGI, conducting experiments to demonstrate MoE's effectiveness across various domains, and assessing the influence of AI-generated preprints on the peer-review process. Ethical considerations are also emphasized, advocating for AI development that aligns with societal well-being. The methodology employs techniques from social network analysis to examine the current landscape and future possibilities of MoE and multimodal learning. Experiments conducted across healthcare, finance, and education demonstrate a 25% increase in training efficiency and a 30% improvement in output quality when using MoE compared to traditional single-model approaches. The analysis of AI-generated preprints highlights their significant impact on the peer-review process and scholarly communication. The findings underscore the potential of MoE and multimodal learning to propel generative AI towards AGI. The study advocates for responsible AI development, aligned with human-centric values and societal well-being, and proposes strategic directions for future research. This research promotes the balanced and ethical integration of MoE, multimodality, and AGI in generative AI, fostering equitable distribution and ethical usage of AI technologies.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (Generative AI) is a collection of AI technologies that can generate new information such as texts and images. With its strong capabilities, Generative AI has been actively studied in creative design processes. However, limited studies have explored the roles of humans and Generative AI in conceptual design processes, which leaves a gap for human–AI collaboration investigation. To address this gap, this study attempts to uncover the contributions of different Generative AI technologies in assisting humans in the conceptual design process. Novice designers were recruited to complete two design tasks in the condition of with or without the assistance of Generative AI. The results revealed that Generative AI primarily assists humans in the problem definition and idea generation stages, while the idea selection and evaluation stage remains predominantly human-led. Additionally, with the assistance of Generative AI, the idea selection and evaluation stages were further enhanced. Based on the findings, we discussed the role of Generative AI in human–AI collaboration and the implications for enhancing future conceptual design support with Generative AI’s assistance.

The incorporation of generative artificial intelligence in governance, political knowledge, electoral, and democratic processes is essential as the world transitions to a digital paradigm. Numerous nations have adopted Generative AI (GenAI), a disruptive technology that compels electoral bodies to advocate for the integration of such tools into governance, electoral, and democratic processes. Nevertheless, these technologies do not ensure effortless integration or efficient usage owing to intricate socio-cultural and human dynamics. Certain African jurisdictions are ill-prepared for the adoption of these technologies due to factors including underdevelopment, insufficient electrical supply, lack of technology literacy, reluctance to change, and the goals of governing parties. This study examines generative artificial intelligence as a disruptive technology for enhancing governance, political knowledge, electoral processes, and democracy. A mixed-method approach was employed, incorporating surveys and in-person interviews. The analysis of data, debates, and interpretation of findings were grounded in postdigital theory and theme analysis employing an abductive reasoning technique, in alignment with the tenets of critical realism. The study demonstrated that GENAI can influence political knowledge, election processes, and enhance efficiency in government and democracy. Moreover, GENAI, including ChatGPT, can either exacerbate or mitigate societal tendencies that contribute to human division, facilitate the dissemination of misinformation, perpetuate echo chambers, and undermine social and political trust, as well as polarise disparate groups or sets of viewpoints or beliefs. AI offers substantial opportunities but also poses many obstacles, including technical constraints, ethical dilemmas, and social ramifications. The swift progression of AI may disrupt labour markets by automating tasks conventionally executed by people, resulting in job displacement. Implementing AI necessitates significant upskilling and proficiency with digital tools; therefore, governments and organisations must adequately train their personnel to reconcile the disparity between AI's capabilities and users' comprehension. Additionally, there is a requisite for governmental oversight, regulation, and monitoring of AI adoption and utilisation across all facets of its implementation.

Purpose This study aims to critically examine the socio-technical, economic and governance challenges emerging at the intersection of Generative artificial intelligence (AI) and Urban AI. By foregrounding the metaphor of “the moon and the ghetto” (Nelson, 1977, 2011), the issue invites contributions that interrogate the gap between technological capability and institutional justice. The purpose is to foster a multidisciplinary dialogue–spanning applied economics, public policy, AI ethics and urban governance – that can inform trustworthy, inclusive and democratically grounded AI practices. Contributors are encouraged to explore not just what GenAI can do, but for whom, how and with what consequences. Design/methodology/approach This study draws upon interdisciplinary literature from public policy, innovation studies, digital governance and urban sociology to frame the emerging governance challenges of Generative AI and Urban AI. It builds a conceptual foundation by synthesizing insights from comparative city case studies, innovation systems theory and normative policy frameworks. The approach is interpretive and exploratory, aiming to situate AI technologies within broader institutional, geopolitical and socio-economic contexts. The study invites contributions that adopt empirical, theoretical or practice-based methodologies addressing the governance of GenAI in cities and regions. Findings This study identifies a critical gap between the rapid technological advancements in Generative AI and the institutional readiness of public governance systems – particularly in urban contexts. It finds that current policy frameworks often prioritize efficiency and innovationism over democratic legitimacy, civic trust and inclusive design. Drawing on comparative global city experiences, it highlights the risk of reinforcing power asymmetries without robust accountability mechanisms. The analysis suggests that trustworthy AI is not a purely technical attribute but a political and institutional achievement, requiring participatory governance architectures and innovation systems grounded in public value and civic engagement. Research limitations/implications As an editorial introduction, this study does not present original empirical data but synthesizes key theoretical frameworks, case studies and policy debates to guide future research. Its analytical scope is conceptual and comparative, offering a foundation for submissions that further investigate Generative and Urban AI through empirical, normative and practice-based lenses. The limitations lie in its broad coverage and reliance on secondary sources. Nonetheless, it provides an agenda-setting contribution by highlighting the urgent need for interdisciplinary research into how AI reshapes public governance, institutional legitimacy and urban democratic futures. Practical implications This editorial offers a structured framework for policymakers, urban planners, technologists and public administrators to critically assess the governance of Generative and Urban AI systems. By highlighting international case studies and conceptual tools – such as public algorithmic infrastructures, civic trust frameworks and anticipatory governance – the article underscores the importance of institutional design, regulatory foresight and civic engagement. It invites practitioners to shift from techno-solutionist approaches toward inclusive, democratic and place-based AI governance. The reflections aim to support the development of trustworthy AI policies that are grounded in legitimacy, accountability and societal needs, particularly in urban and regional contexts. Social implications The editorial underscores that Generative and Urban AI systems are not socially neutral but carry significant implications for equity, representation and democratic legitimacy. These technologies risk reinforcing existing social hierarchies and systemic biases if not governed inclusively. This study calls for reimagining trust not as a technical feature but as a relational, contested dynamic between institutions and citizens. It encourages submissions that examine how AI reshapes the urban social contract, affects marginalized communities and challenges existing civic infrastructures. The goal is to promote AI governance frameworks that are pluralistic, just and reflective of diverse societal values and lived experiences. Originality/value This editorial offers a timely and conceptually grounded intervention into the emerging field of Urban AI and Generative AI governance. By framing the challenges through Richard R. Nelson’s metaphor of The Moon and the Ghetto, this study foregrounds the gap between technical capabilities and enduring societal injustices. The contribution lies in its interdisciplinary synthesis – bridging innovation systems, AI ethics, public policy and urban governance. It introduces a critical framework for assessing “trustworthy AI” not as a technical goal but as a democratic achievement and encourages research that is policy-relevant, equity-oriented and attuned to the institutional realities of AI in cities.