@incollection{FreyerKempt2023,
  author    = {Freyer, Nils and Kempt, Hendrik},
  title     = {AI-DSS in healthcare and their power over health-insecure collectives},
  series = {Justice in global health},
  booktitle = {Justice in global health},
  editor    = {Bhakuni, Himani and Miotto, Lucas},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  address   = {London},
  isbn      = {9781003399933},
  doi       = {10.4324/9781003399933-4},
  pages     = {38 -- 55},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {AI-based systems are nearing ubiquity not only in everyday low-stakes activities but also in medical procedures. To protect patients and physicians alike, explainability requirements have been proposed for the operation of AI-based decision support systems (AI-DSS), which adds hurdles to the productive use of AI in clinical contexts. This raises two questions: Who decides these requirements? And how should access to AI-DSS be provided to communities that reject these standards (particularly when such communities are expert-scarce)? This chapter investigates a dilemma that emerges from the implementation of global AI governance. While rejecting global AI governance limits the ability to help communities in need, global AI governance risks undermining and subjecting health-insecure communities to the force of the neo-colonial world order. For this, this chapter first surveys the current landscape of AI governance and introduces the approach of relational egalitarianism as key to (global health) justice. To discuss the two horns of the referred dilemma, the core power imbalances faced by health-insecure collectives (HICs) are examined. The chapter argues that only strong demands of a dual strategy towards health-secure collectives can both remedy the immediate needs of HICs and enable them to become healthcare independent.},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{EggertZaehlWolfetal.2023,
  author    = {Eggert, Mathias and Z{\"a}hl, Philipp M. and Wolf, Martin R. and Haase, Martin},
  title     = {Applying leaderboards for quality improvement in software development projects},
  series = {Software Engineering for Games in Serious Contexts},
  booktitle = {Software Engineering for Games in Serious Contexts},
  editor    = {Cooper, Kendra M.L. and Bucchiarone, Antonio},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-031-33337-8 (Print)},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-031-33338-5_11},
  pages     = {243 -- 263},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {Software development projects often fail because of insufficient code quality. It is now well documented that the task of testing software, for example, is perceived as uninteresting and rather boring, leading to poor software quality and major challenges to software development companies. One promising approach to increase the motivation for considering software quality is the use of gamification. Initial research works already investigated the effects of gamification on software developers and come to promising. Nevertheless, a lack of results from field experiments exists, which motivates the chapter at hand. By conducting a gamification experiment with five student software projects and by interviewing the project members, the chapter provides insights into the changing programming behavior of information systems students when confronted with a leaderboard. The results reveal a motivational effect as well as a reduction of code smells.},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{EggertMoulen2023,
  author    = {Eggert, Mathias and Moulen, Tobias},
  title     = {Auswahl von Gesch{\"a}ftsprozessen zur Anwendung von Robotic Process Automation - Vergleich relevanter Kriterien aus Theorie und Praxis},
  series = {Robotik in der Wirtschaftsinformatik},
  booktitle = {Robotik in der Wirtschaftsinformatik},
  editor    = {D'Onofrio, Sara and Meinhardt, Stefan},
  publisher = {Springer Vieweg},
  address   = {Wiesbaden},
  isbn      = {978-3-658-39620-6 (Print)},
  pages     = {107 -- 129},
  year      = {2023},
  abstract  = {Die Auswahl der passenden Gesch{\"a}ftsprozesse f{\"u}r eine Automatisierung mittels Robotic Process Automation (RPA) ist f{\"u}r den Erfolg von RPA-Projekten entscheidend. Das vorliegende Kapitel liefert daf{\"u}r Selektionskriterien, die aus einer qualitativen Studie mit elf interviewten RPA-Experten aus dem Versicherungsumfeld resultieren. Das Ergebnis umfasst eine gewichtete Liste von sieben Dimensionen und 51 Prozesskriterien, welche die Automatisierung mit Softwarerobotern beg{\"u}nstigen beziehungsweise deren Nichterf{\"u}llung eine Umsetzung erschweren oder sogar verhindern. Die drei wichtigsten Kriterien zur Auswahl von Gesch{\"a}ftsprozessen f{\"u}r die Automatisierung mittels RPA umfassen die Entlastung der an dem Prozess mitwirkenden Mitarbeiter (Arbeitnehmerentlastung), die Ausf{\"u}hrbarkeit des Prozesses mittels Regeln (Regelbasierte Prozessteuerung) sowie ein positiver Kosten-Nutzen-Vergleich. Auf diesen Ergebnissen aufbauend wird ein Vergleich mit den bereits bekannten Selektionskriterien aus der Literatur erstellt und diskutiert. Praktiker k{\"o}nnen die Ergebnisse verwenden, um eine systematische Auswahl von RPA-relevanten Prozessen vorzunehmen. Aus wissenschaftlicher Perspektive stellen die Ergebnisse eine Grundlage zur Erkl{\"a}rung des Erfolgs und Misserfolgs von RPA-Projekten dar.},
  language  = {de}
}