Draft of SWIB community AI policy for public comment

General
1

In 2025, we have started a discussion about the guidelines we want to give ourselves as a community with respect to the use of generative AI in all aspects of SWIB topics, interacting during the SWIB conference and throughout the year (see here: Working towards an AI policy for SWIB: an appeal to the SWIB community).

The SWIB PC has come up with a draft for an SWIB AI policy, see below, which we would like to discuss with the SWIB community before officially adopting it. Please put any feedback you have in comments under this topic before the end of 2026. We would like to know specifically if

  • any aspects in the policy need to be clarified in order to decide whether any work that you do and that can be seen as related to SWIB topics complies with it or not
  • the policy as presented in the draft would currently exclude you from presenting your work at SWIB in the future
  • you think the policy is too lax or too strict or if parts are beside the point
  • you have any other feedback.

We will also have a session at SWIB26 for interested community members in order to have an interactive discussion of all aspects you deem relevant: AI Policy Community Session.

We are grateful for any input you have because SWIB is, SWIB consists of its community, and we would not want to adopt any policy that does not reflect the values and perspectives of its members.

Draft of SWIB community AI policy for public comment

The term “Artificial Intelligence” dates back to at least the 1950s, and has been used to refer to a wide range of technologies, many of which otherwise have very little in common. While this broad category has traditionally included a number of highly useful techniques, its modern usage often refers specifically to Large Language Models (LLMs) and so-called Generative AI (genAI). Due to the term’s ambiguity and the controversy surrounding modern trends in AI, we aim to provide a policy which distinguishes between these uses and highlights exactly which applications we consider inappropriate for SWIB.

There are a range of well-justified concerns about the newer definition of AI: It is premised on non-consensually harvested data, labeled by workers who are not fairly compensated, with little transparency from the corporations that engage in these practices. We reject the notion that an AI model can reasonably be considered open source without the availability of its training data (as opposed to, for example, the less strict position of the Open Source Initiative). The scale of such models makes it such that individuals without significant monetary and computational resources cannot meaningfully evaluate their qualities and behaviour, rendering the freedoms afforded by supposedly open source AI a mostly abstract notion.

Likewise, these systems have a considerable impact on the environment, directly or indirectly increasing demand for fossil fuels and exacerbating the climate crisis, drawing considerable amounts of clean water in regions that are already facing droughts, requiring an increase in the production of microchips that include rare minerals, and producing dramatic amounts of e-waste due to the intensiveness of the model training process. Much more could be said about the real and potential harms of these technologies, however, it is probably sufficient to state that we are not interested in providing yet another uncritical platform for the promotion of these implicitly corporate technologies. We strongly suggest that those who are considering submitting such content do so elsewhere.

We encourage that in the SWIB context community members strive towards a targeted, staggered use of AI-based applications: What is the smallest tool you could use? Is the use of generative AI really necessary? Make sure that you prioritize tools that are resource-friendly, locally hosted, open source (or at least open weight), were created under ethically sound conditions, for the public interest, preserve data privacy and ensure transparency and reproducibility.

If you choose to use generative AI (genAI) in the context of SWIB for any of the following purposes, please note:

  • preparation of abstracts: using genAI-based tools within narrow limits is acceptable, for example machine translation and tooling that helps with grammar and spelling – however, the authors assume full responsibility for their contribution
  • preparation of presentations: using genAI-based tools within narrow limits while creating your presentation is acceptable, for example machine translation and tooling that helps with grammar and spelling
    • clearly and transparently declare any use of genAI-based tools you have employed to prepare your presentation
    • review and edit any genAI-generated content, do not just adopt it as is
    • we strongly discourage the use of genAI for the creation of pictures with mere decorative value for your presentation
    • presenters assume full responsibility for their talk and do not list genAI tools as authors
  • scope of SWIB concerning AI applications reported on in presentations
    • we do not tolerate the promotion of proprietary AI applications in experiments or productive environments
    • individual use of proprietary models in order to draw a comparison to open source or open weight models is permissible within the narrow limits of a reasonable spending of resources (see above)
  • featuring FOSS developed with AI support
  • reviewing of submitted proposals by the Programme Committee
    • the SWIB Programme Committee will not use any genAI in their review process of submitted proposals in order to maintain the trust of the SWIB community – we keep committed to ensuring quality where it matters most

Sources and inspirations used in this policy