This graduation project explored the environmental nuisances experienced by houseboat residents in Amsterdam due to vessel traffic. The findings show that the experience of nuisance is influenced by both contextual factors (such as past experiences, type of boat, time, and location) and environmental factors (such as noise and movement).
By reflecting on insights gathered through qualitative research, this project aligns with its initial goal of exploring new methods for measuring environmental nuisance.

In an era dominated by technological solutionism, artificial intelligence (AI) is often seen as a quick fix for complex problems. Inspired by the surrealist notion of pataphysics, this graduation project employs a novel, critical design approach to address the imaginary problem of trustworthy AI and its solutions in the context of generative chatbots.

This project presents three pataphysical chatbots, each addressing a specific requirement—transparency, human control, or fairness—currently implemented in AI systems through technical mechanisms intended to ensure trust. Each chatbot is designed to deliberately exaggerate the mechanism behind the assumed requirement, aiming to help users understand the absurdist nature of the chatbot and, ultimately, provoke critical reflection on the pursuit of trustworthy AI.

Through an iterative design process of prototyping, testing, and reflecting upon pataphysical chatbots, progress was made toward the final pata-design, which was evaluated in an online experiment. A key insight emerged: while the pataphysical chatbots succeeded in conveying their absurdist nature to users, critical reflection on the pursuit of trustworthy AI did not occur. However, additional findings suggest a potential link between understanding the absurdity and the occurrence of this particular type of critical reflection.

Ultimately, this project contributes to the critical design practice and in particular the field of pataphysical design, by demonstrating how pataphysical chatbots can effectively challenge both the prevailing methods for achieving trustworthy AI as the dominant problem-solution paradigm of AI solutionism. Moreover, the pataphysical design approach proposed in this project offers a new direction for current pataphysical design practices, emphasizing the creation of engaging pataphysical experiences that aim to provoke specific user responses to the premises of the imaginary problem.

As more smart city technologies are being developed, more attention should be directed on how to include citizens to align such technology with public values and facilitate contestability. This involvement can take place during different phases. To ensure the legitimacy of a machine vision system, citizens should be involved to discuss when a model is performing acceptably. However, enabling this civic participation is a challenge due to a lack of awareness, knowledge, and understanding.

This graduation project explores opening up the discussion around acceptability of a machine vision system, using the scan car development process in Amsterdam as a use case. This discussion clarified acceptability based on trade-offs made during the development phase. To open up this discussion, citizens first need to be able to understand before they can judge such a system and its trade-offs. This resulted in creating a tangible approach to machine vision development, merging elements from fields as TUI and XAI.

The final design was evaluated within three sessions. The results suggest that providing a tangible representation and context-specific examples improved the subjective understanding of participants. The design enabled participants to form and articulate their own opinion about what is acceptable and take part in this discussion. The findings suggest that a tangible approach to participatory machine learning could involve
citizens and other non-expert stakeholders in informing and steering a machine vision model during the development phase to close the legitimacy gap.

Facilitating this communication, the project shows a possible contestability loop between citizens and developers in the co-construction of public AI. Ultimately, the design contributes to the field of participatory design approaches to public and responsible AI by providing a practical example.

Roads are currently governed by relatively static rules communicated via road signs, road surface markings and navigation apps. However they could also be dynamic, allowing road space to be allocated for a multitude of activities over time. The Code the Streets project envisions a digital system for managing urban mobility in Amsterdam that would allow for this dynamic allocation of road space. Road rules are intended to be used to foster specific civic values such as livability or sustainability within the city. But how do we ensure fairness within such a system? This project explores how we can reimagine the smart allocation of road space in Amsterdam for fairness. Fairness is framed within this project as an ideal that cannot be reached but can be approximated through continuous adaptation. Inspired by literature on contestable AI, the continuous adaptation of the system is approached through stakeholder participation. The project relied on research in the form of literature review, expert interviews, and hands-on experimentation as well as the review of related design work. This research inspired design goals and criteria for the project’s design outcome: a system map and a speculative prototype. The map presents a system in which stakeholders have substantial influence over the values that the system and its design process foster. The speculative prototype, a low-tech user experience installation, makes parts of this system tangible and presents a provocative proposal for an alternative perspective on the current practice of road space allocation. The project ultimately produced several insights contributing to existing literature in the fields of public AI and design methodology research as well as delivering recommendations for Code the Streets.

In 2008 more than 50 percent of all people, 3.3 billion people, lived in urban areas according to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA - United Nations Population Fund, n.d.). By 2030 this will be approximately 5 billion (Lea, 2017). On the one hand, with fast urban growth also come challenges in the way we build and manage cities. On the other hand, technologies that are discovered in this era of digitization can produce opportunities for the economic and social development of cities. Not only making sure that cities stay safe and livable, but also to improve them, these technologies are indispensable. Worldwide engineers turn to technology to tackle challenges of fast urban growth (Arroub et al., 2016). Aside from tackling these challenges, technologies provide opportunities for economic and social development of cities keeping the cities safe and livable. Both of these aspects are often gathered under the term: ‘Smart City’. Though there are many definitions, visions or imaginaries of what a smart city is or should be, there are key elements that can be attributed to ‘smart cities’. One of the key elements of a smart city is collecting data through sensors embedded in our surroundings to better understand, monitor, regulate and plan the city, with the goal to stimulate and support innovation and economic growth and provide sustainable and efficient urban management and development (Kitchin, 2014). However, data raises concerns regarding its design, development and deployment for smart cities (Al Nuaimi et al., 2015) as well as other concerns relating to ethical issues (Kitchin, 2014). Privacy certainly proves to be the most prominent issue in digitization and big data (Kool et al., 2017). Several international organizations have even identified privacy as a key policy, regulatory and legislation challenge of the 21st century (van Zoonen, 2016). This leads to the following design goal:
“Designing a tour that enables citizens of Utrecht to critically reflect on the collection and use of their personal data and its privacy consequences within the smart city”. Pusca is an application based Personal Utrecht Smart City Assistant that takes the user on a one time tour through Utrecht to explore and experience smart city technologies that could improve their quality of life. Each of the stops presents a service provided by a smart city technology that can be experienced by sharing personal data. The user is asked to make a trade-off between their estimated privacy value of the asked personal data and the benefits of the presented smart technology. At the end of the tour the user gets confronted with privacy consequences of sharing their personal data that provokes a critical reflection on the trade-offs that the user made during the tour. This design is a start for knowing how we want our privacy to be protected, by letting people create an opinion about this. I hope that this project can be a first step into creating a society where open and standard policies about safeguarding citizens’ privacy within smart city technologies will be secured.

The Smart Bench is a speculative design aiming to create critical awareness about the social implications of Data-driven Nudging in the Smart City. The project originated from a critical perspective on Smart City as a leading urban development paradigm. Many cities labelling themselves as smart cities competitively implemented advanced technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), pervasive sensor networks, or internet of things (IoT) for infrastructural or economic purposes (Kitchin et al, 2015; Townsend, 2013). This enabled ubiquitous extraction and monitoring of urban behavioral data, facilitating more efficient, resilient, and frictionless urban governance.Data-driven nudging emerged as vast aggregate of citizen behavioral insights became available to be implemented into the concept of ‘nudge’, a libertarian paternalistic strategy of behavior change (Ranchordás, 2019; Thaler & Sunstein, 2008). Citizen behaviors can be steered more elaborately through targeted and dynamic adjustment of choice architecture enabled by development of analytical algorithms. Pervasively embedded network of urban sensors has made this new type of nudge more invisible, thus more powerful. Hence, data-driven nudging is raising ethical concerns in terms of behavioral manipulation, ubiquitous surveillance, and urban depoliticisation (Kitchin et al, 2015; Lanzing, 2018; Ranchordás, 2019; Void et al, 2018; Yeung, 2016). Making matters worse, citizens’s level of awareness not only on data-driven nudging itself but also on smart city in general turned out to be significantly lacking (Government Europa, 2018; Jameson et al, 2019). The project addresses the lack of awareness of the presence of data-driven nudging and its social implications by designing a speculative experience of Smart Bench. The Smart Bench is an intelligent bench which is designed to nudge citizen behaviors according to a predetermined algorithm. Because smart technologies tend to reproduce pre-existing prevailing biases, the purpose of the design is to make them experiential to the general public. Participants are invited to try out the bench and a special interface where they could take a look at the software principles behind it and have a unique opportunity to adjust the nudging algorithm for others. As they proceed along the experience, participants can experience the discriminatory implications of data-driven nudging and openly discuss its application for urban governance. The evaluation results confirmed a fruitful capacity of speculative design in terms of materialising an abstract unfamiliar concept and evoking critical awareness on its potential implications. Most of all, the design provided participants with a space for open discussions about the necessity of data-driven nudging for urban governance and further reflect on pre-existing discrimination in our current society.

For data-intensive research, Wi-Fi access data has become an important source since it’s low-cost, convenient and rich in information. It is mainly used to study people’s movement and then used to infer individuals’ or a group of people’s behavior pattern. The application of the research result is also common. It could be used to do interior positioning, crowd management, facility management and more. As the Global Data Privacy Regulation (GDPR) became enforceable in 2018, it set strict rules for personal data collection and usage. Since Wi-Fi access data contains personal information and it’s hard to be anonymised for research purposes, GDPR brings more limitations for people like researchers when they deal with Wi-Fi access data. The GDPR triggers the development of a data platform in TU Delft, which aims at sharing data to researchers in a legal way. This data platform will legitimate the management of such personal data, helping the researchers to get and process the data in a GDPR-compliant way. Three stakeholders are involved in this context: the ICT Department as the data controller, researchers and designers as the data requester, and the students and employees in the TU campus as the data subject. All their values need to be taken seriously when developing the platform. Thus, the aim of the research is to bridge the gap between the stakeholder’s values and the implementations of the platform developers. Literature review is conducted first, discussing why ethics are important in platform design. Then the background information about Wi-Fi access data and GDPR are researched, so as an overview of the data platform. Then the research uses Friedman’s Value Sensitive Design methods to explore the values of different stakeholder entities. Methods like interview, questionnaire and generative session are used to collect the stakeholders’ insights. Then the insights are analysed, being defined as different values according to Schwartz’s theory of Basic Human Values. Then, a toolkit is designed through two minimum viable product (MVP) iterations. It communicates the values to the platform developers, then inspire them to come up with functionalities that fulfill the values. The form of the toolkit are two sets of cards. The first card set are ‘values cards’. On the frontside of each card, a defined value, a sub-value and one quote from the stakeholder that help to understand the value are shown. On the backside of each card, questions that help the developers to measure whether this value is met are asked. The second card set are ‘inspiration cards’. It shows one or more functionality that could be developed to fulfill each value, triggering the developers coming up with more tangible features. It is expected that the toolkit will be used in the group discussions when deciding what functionalities will be implemented into the platform, to speak for the absent stakeholders as well as to trigger discussion. Finally, the limitations of the research are discussed, the whole project is concluded and personal reflection is made.