andras/great-ai
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests 1 Projects Releases 4 Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Improve thesis based on comments from @suzanv

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Andras Schmelczer 2022-09-04 18:44:10 +02:00
parent 2c8c5cf589
commit 4653ef3459
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 0EA1BC97D0AB076E
9 changed files with 83 additions and 57 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

16
docs/thesis/chapters/3_methods.tex
View file

@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Overall, this problem context carries the properties of typical industry use cas
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.75\linewidth]{figures/design-cycle.drawio.png}
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{figures/design-cycle.drawio.png}
\captionsetup{width=.9\linewidth}
\caption{Implementation of the Design Cycle of design science \cite{wieringa2014design} for our problem context of AI/ML deployments. The thinner arrows denote smaller but more frequent iterations.}
\label{fig:design-cycle}
@ -32,12 +32,16 @@ The design cycle summarising the research approach is shown in Figure \ref{fig:d
\section{Applicability \& generalisability} \label{section:interview-setup}
To conclusively answer \textbf{RQ3} and \textbf{RQ4}, interviews are conducted with a population of software engineers and data scientists with varying levels of professional background. The interview candidates were recruited from the recommendations of my acquaintances, who were kindly asked to seek out people from their professional networks with any connection to AI/ML. After the first few interviews, participants were also asked to suggest other candidates, preferably from different subfields. After two iterations of reaching out to potential interviewees personally, ten engineers and researchers eventually responded positively and participated in the study.
To conclusively answer \textbf{RQ3} and \textbf{RQ4}, interviews are conducted with a population of software engineers and data scientists with varying levels of professional background. The interview candidates were recruited from the recommendations of my acquaintances, who were kindly asked to seek out people from their professional networks with any connection to AI/ML. After the first few interviews, participants were also asked to suggest other candidates, preferably from different subfields. After two iterations of reaching out to potential interviewees personally, ten engineers and researchers eventually responded positively and participated in the study. Albeit the sample size is small, it still represents a wide range of organisation types: experts were included from startups, consultancies, government organisations, and research companies.
First, before their interview, participants are requested to complete a questionnaire (shown in Appendix \ref{appendix:practices}) about their last completed AI project; the questions refer to the best practices implemented by \textit{GreatAI}. They are also advised to take a quick look at the tutorial page of the documentation. The interviews are divided into two halves. In the first part, after a brief introduction, interviewees are asked to solve a real-world task by finishing a partially completed example application using \textit{GreatAI}. They are also encouraged to think aloud so their feedback can be noted. Successfully completing the task creates a system implementing a known number of best practices. This way, the added value --- in terms of a larger number of implemented best practices --- can be quantitatively analysed by comparing the qualities of the finished implementation with the previously given answers.
First, before their interview, participants are requested to complete a questionnaire (shown in Appendix \ref{appendix:practices}) about their last completed AI project; the questions refer to the best practices implemented by \textit{GreatAI}. They are also advised to take a quick look at the tutorial page of the documentation.
Notes are taken throughout the interviews and subsequently extended using reflective journaling \cite{halcomb2006verbatim} combined with thematic coding. After which, the insights from the interviewed professionals are distilled using the techniques of thematic analysis \cite{fereday2006demonstrating} following the methodologies of \cite{cruz2019catalog} and \cite{haakman2021ai}. These insights can then be combined with the numerical results to explain and elaborate on them.
The interviews are divided into two halves. In the first part, after a brief introduction, interviewees are asked to solve a real-world deployment task by finishing a partially completed example project\footnote{Available at \href{https://github.com/schmelczer/great-ai-interview-task}{github.com/schmelczer/great-ai-interview-task}. The training part of the task has already been done, and the participants only have to deploy a trained classifier.} using \textit{GreatAI}. This is a more straightforward instance of the AI development lifecycle presented in the \textit{GreatAI} tutorials. The interviews took approximately one and a half hours each.
The second half consists of a short survey allowing to create the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) \cite{davis1989perceived} of the problem context. The ultimate goal of the presented library is to help increase the adoption rate of best practices. In order to reach that goal, first, the library itself has to gain adoption. TAM and its numerous variations provide means of measuring users' willingness of adopting new technologies. TAM has been widely applied in literature \cite{marangunic2015technology}, and due to its general psychological origins, it proves to be effective in other areas of technology, not just software \cite{riemenschneider2002explaining}.
They are also encouraged to think aloud so their feedback can be noted. Successfully completing the task creates a system implementing a known number of best practices. This way, the added value --- in terms of a larger number of implemented best practices --- can be quantitatively analysed by comparing the qualities of the finished implementation with the previously given answers.
The guidelines proposed by Halcomb et al. \cite{halcomb2006verbatim} are followed for collecting information from interviews and reporting it. This reflexive, iterative process starts by recording participants (with their permission) and concurrent note-taking. Reflective journaling is immediately done post-interview, which is subsequently extended and revised by listening to the recordings. Afterwards, the gathered information is interpreted by applying the methodology of thematic analysis \cite{alhojailan2012thematic}. Thematic analysis is an iterative qualitative investigation technique consisting of labelling, correlating, and structuring the central recurring topics raised during discussions. It has been successfully used in previous software engineering studies for extracting emergent patterns \cite{haakman2021ai,cruz2019catalog}.
The parsimonious version of TAM will be employed, which was measured to have similar predictive power to that of the original TAM while having fewer variables \cite{wu2011user}. Parsimonious TAM observes three interconnected human aspects that influence the actual behaviour (adoption): perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and intention to use. Participants are asked ten questions corresponding to these aspects of their experience using \textit{GreatAI}. The questionnaire is shown in Appendix \ref{appendix:questions}. The internal consistency of the answers is calculated using Chronbach's Alpha \cite{bland1997statistics}, after which the responses are reflected upon.
The second half of the one-on-one sessions consists of a short survey allowing us to create the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) \cite{davis1989perceived} of the problem context. The ultimate goal of the presented library is to help increase the adoption rate of best practices. In order to reach that goal, first, the library itself has to gain adoption. TAM and its numerous variations provide means of measuring users' willingness of adopting new technologies. TAM has been widely applied in literature \cite{marangunic2015technology}, and due to its general psychological origins, it proves to be effective in other areas of technology, not just software \cite{riemenschneider2002explaining}.
The parsimonious version of TAM is employed, which has been measured to have similar predictive power to that of the original TAM while having fewer variables \cite{wu2011user}. Parsimonious TAM observes three interconnected human aspects that influence the actual behaviour (adoption): perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and intention to use. Participants are asked ten questions corresponding to these aspects of their experience using \textit{GreatAI}. The questionnaire is shown in Appendix \ref{appendix:questions}. The internal consistency of the answers is calculated using Cronbach's Alpha \cite{bland1997statistics}, after which the responses are reflected upon.