PDF(1574 KB)
PDF(1574 KB)
PDF(1574 KB)
建构与驯化：人工智能主播的技术路径与演化逻辑
Constructing and domesticating: the technical path and evolutionary logic of artificial intelligence anchors
人工智能技术进驻新闻传播领域所产生的“人工智能主播”，糅合了记者、播音员主持人等角色，成为数字化的信息传播“代言人”。本文探索了人工智能主播以文本、语音、图像三个维度为技术搭建基础，经历声音的文本转化、智能语音对话、多模态交互三个技术进化节点，实现或正在实现新闻编辑室的外化、类型化和个性化的技术进化路径。并基于其技术发展面向，以设计的视角归纳出一个以语言符号为表现形式，以角色和规范为基础逻辑的技术建构框架。在未来人机共生的社会生态中，人工智能主播将可能超越传统意义上的播音员主持人，在视听传播范式、新闻生产方式和传受关系等方面实现突破和重构，而“智能体设计”应当作为驯化智能技术、维持人主体性地位的手段，获得业界及学界的更多关注。
AI anchors emerging after the introduction of AI technology to the field of news communication have combined such roles as journalists and news anchors and become the “spokespersons” for digital information communication. This paper explores the technological evolution path of AI anchors that has realized or is now realizing the externalization, typification and personalization of newsrooms based on the three technical dimensions of text, voice and image and through three technological evolution nodes of speech-to-text conversion, intelligent voice dialogue and multimodal interaction. Based on its technical development direction, the paper takes a perspective of design, summarizes a technical construction framework with linguistic symbols as the expression form and roles and norms as the base logic. In the future social ecology of human-computer symbiosis, AI anchors will likely overtake traditional anchors, achieving breakthroughs and reshuffling in audiovisual communication paradigms, news production methods, and sender-receiver relationships. The “agent design” should receive more attention from the industry and academia as a means to domesticate intelligent technology and maintain the status of human subjectivity.
人工智能主播 / 技术路径 / 演化逻辑 / 建构框架 / 人机协同
AI anchor / technological path / evolution logic / construction framework / human-computer collaboration
| [1] |
布莱恩·阿瑟(2011/2014). 《技术的本质:技术是什么,它是如何进化的》(曹东溟,王健译). 杭州: 浙江人民出版社.
|
| [2] |
陈力丹(2006). 试论人际传播. 《西南民族大学学报(人文社科版)》,(10),191-197.
|
| [3] |
丁水木(1987). 略论社会学的角色理论及其实践意义. 《社会学研究》,(6),101-104.
|
| [4] |
国家广播电视总局(2021). 广播电视和网络视听“十四五”科技发展规划.检索于 http://www.nrta.gov.cn/art/2021/10/20/art_3713_58260.html.
|
| [5] |
罗洛夫(1982/1997). 《人际传播社会交换论》(王江龙译). 上海: 上海译文出版社.
|
| [6] |
孙玮(2018). 交流者的身体:传播与在场——意识主体、身体-主体、智能主体的演变. 《国际新闻界》,(12),83-103.
|
| [7] |
张培富, 李艳红(2000). 技术创新过程的自组织进化. 《科学管理研究》,(6),1-4.
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
Social intelligence in robots has a quite recent history in artificial intelligence and robotics. However, it has become increasingly apparent that social and interactive skills are necessary requirements in many application areas and contexts where robots need to interact and collaborate with other robots or humans. Research on human–robot interaction (HRI) poses many challenges regarding the nature of interactivity and ‘social behaviour’ in robot and humans. The first part of this paper addresses dimensions of HRI, discussing requirements on social skills for robots and introducing the conceptual space of HRI studies. In order to illustrate these concepts, two examples of HRI research are presented. First, research is surveyed which investigates the development of a cognitive robot companion. The aim of this work is to develop social rules for robot behaviour (a ‘robotiquette’) that is comfortable and acceptable to humans. Second, robots are discussed as possible educational or therapeutic toys for children with autism. The concept of interactive emergence in human–child interactions is highlighted. Different types of play among children are discussed in the light of their potential investigation in human–robot experiments. The paper concludes by examining different paradigms regarding ‘social relationships’ of robots and people interacting with them.
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
Previous work on social categorization has shown that people often use cues such as a person's gender, age, or ethnicity to categorize and form impressions of others. The present research investigated effects of social category membership on the evaluation of humanoid robots. More specifically, participants rated a humanoid robot that either belonged to their in-group or to a national out-group with regard to anthropomorphism (e.g., mind attribution, warmth), psychological closeness, contact intentions, and design. We predicted that participants would show an in-group bias towards the robot that ostensibly belonged to their in-group--as indicated by its name and location of production. In line with our hypotheses, participants not only rated the in-group robot more favourably--importantly, they also anthropomorphized it more strongly than the out-group robot. Our findings thus document that people even apply social categorization processes and subsequent differential social evaluations to robots.©2011 The British Psychological Society.
|
| [19] |
In this article, I address the question whether or not robots should be social actors and suggest that we do not have much choice but to construe collaborative robots as social actors. Social cues, including emotional displays, serve coordination functions in human interaction and therefore have to be used, even by robots, in order for long-term collaboration to succeed. While robots lack the experiential basis of emotional display, also in human interaction much emotional expression is part of conventional social practice; if robots are to participate in such social practices, they need to produce such signals as well. I conclude that if we aim to share our social spaces with robots, they better be social actors, which may even include the display of emotions. This finding is of empirical as well as philosophical relevance because it shifts the ethical discussion away from the question, how social collaborative robots should be, to the question, what kinds of human-robot collaborations we want.
|
| [20] |
We conducted an online experiment to study people’s perception of automated computer-written news. Using a 2 × 2 × 2 design, we varied the article topic (sports, finance; within-subjects) and both the articles’ actual and declared source (human-written, computer-written; between-subjects). Nine hundred eighty-six subjects rated two articles on credibility, readability, and journalistic expertise. Varying the declared source had small but consistent effects: subjects rated articles declared as human written always more favorably, regardless of the actual source. Varying the actual source had larger effects: subjects rated computer-written articles as more credible and higher in journalistic expertise but less readable. Across topics, subjects’ perceptions did not differ. The results provide conservative estimates for the favorability of computer-written news, which will further increase over time and endorse prior calls for establishing ethics of computer-written news.
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
Self-endorsement—depicting the “self” as an endorser of a brand—represents a potentially powerful advertising strategy made possible by new media. This experiment tests the hypothesis that receiving brand recommendations from an intelligent personal assistant believed to be tailored to one’s own characteristics and consumer interests yields higher brand attitude and purchase intention toward the (self-endorsed) brand than receiving brand recommendations from a typical, but not self-tailored, intelligent personal assistant. Because endorsement is a well-known and highly effective advertising strategy, this is a high bar. We present evidence for self-referencing as an underlying mechanism, and perceived interactivity and identification as boundary conditions of self-endorsing. Consumers may show skepticism toward advertising but may not know how to be skeptical of themselves. As consumers outsource their tasks and decisions to new artificial intelligence (AI)-driven devices, they will need to be attentive to new media biases that threaten productive use of these devices.
|
| [23] |
We define Artificial Intelligence-Mediated Communication (AI-MC) as interpersonal communication in which an intelligent agent operates on behalf of a communicator by modifying, augmenting, or generating messages to accomplish communication goals. The recent advent of AI-MC raises new questions about how technology may shape human communication and requires re-evaluation – and potentially expansion – of many of Computer-Mediated Communication’s (CMC) key theories, frameworks, and findings. A research agenda around AI-MC should consider the design of these technologies and the psychological, linguistic, relational, policy and ethical implications of introducing AI into human–human communication. This article aims to articulate such an agenda.
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
The Computers are Social Actors (CASA) paradigm was proposed more than two decades ago to understand humans’ interaction with computer technologies. Today, as emerging technologies like social robots become more personal and persuasive, questions of how users respond to them socially, what individual factors leverage the relationship, and what constitutes the social influence of these technologies need to be addressed. A lab experiment was conducted to examine the interactions between individual differences and social robots’ vocal and kinetic cues. Results suggested that users developed more trust in a social robot with a human voice than with a synthetic voice. Users also developed more intimacy and interest in the social robot when it was paired with humanlike gestures. Moreover, individual differences including users’ gender, attitudes toward robots, and robot exposure affected their psychological responses. The theoretical, practical, and ethical value of the findings was further discussed in the study.
|
| [48] |
This article examines the emerging phenomenon of humanoid social robots and human-humanoid interactions. A central argument of this article is that humanoid social robots belong to a special type of robotic technology used for communicating and interacting with humans. These robotic entities, which can be in either mechanical or digital form, are autonomous, interactive and humanlike. Some of them are used to interact with humans for utilitarian purposes and others are designed to trigger human emotions. Incorporation of such robotic entities into the realm of social life invariably alters the condition as well as the dynamics of human interaction, giving rise to a synthetic society in which humans co-mingle with humanoids. More research is needed to investigate the social and cultural impact of this unfolding robotic revolution.
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
