arXiv subjects

Davide Ghia

Publications and source records attributed to Davide Ghia.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

When AI Enters the Workplace, Who Faces Greater Risks? A Gendered Analysis

Gender inequality remains a persistent structural feature of the labour market, shaping women's lifetime earnings and economic security. As artificial intelligence (AI) transforms organisational practices, there is growing concern that existing disparities may be unintentionally amplified through task automation, unequal access to upskilling opportunities, and differential returns obtained from technological change. In this paper, we examine how exposure to AI-driven innovation varies across male- and female-dominated occupations, with particular attention to differences across the skill and wage distribution. Using a novel dataset that links occupational characteristics to measures of AI exposure, we analyse how recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) and broader AI technologies are distributed across the labour market. Our findings show that, while AI exposure is generally concentrated in higher-skilled and higher-paid occupations for male-dominated occupations, female-dominated occupations display relatively uniform levels of exposure across both high-skilled, high-paid, and low-skilled, low-paid occupations. Moreover, we find that LLM-related exposure is higher in female-dominated occupations, while exposure to broader AI innovation remains more concentrated in male-dominated occupations. A triangulation of these results with existing literature suggests that women, particularly those in the most vulnerable positions (lower-skilled and lower-paid female-dominated occupations), may face greater exposure to forms of AI associated with task automation, job restructuring, reduction of wages and limited career progression.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Will AI Agents Free Us From Meaningless Work? A Human-Centered Analysis

Some claim that AI agents will free workers from the boring parts of their jobs, yet little is known about how workers themselves identify which tasks should be automated. Prior research focuses on occupations, overlooking that workers experience varying levels of meaning across tasks within the same role. We address this gap with a task-level analysis grounded in Graeber's theory of bullshit jobs. Using ratings from 202 workers on 171 workplace tasks, we (1) validate a five-item scale of perceived bullshitness, (2) show that perceived bullshitness strongly predicts desire for AI delegation, and (3) find that such tasks are also seen as requiring less human oversight. Together, these findings suggest that tasks perceived as bullshit are natural candidates for AI delegation, aligning worker preferences with perceived feasibility.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

A Concept-based approach to Voice Disorder Detection

Voice disorders affect a significant portion of the population, and the ability to diagnose them using automated, non-invasive techniques would represent a substantial advancement in healthcare, improving the quality of life of patients. Recent studies have demonstrated that artificial intelligence models, particularly Deep Neural Networks (DNNs), can effectively address this task. However, due to their complexity, the decision-making process of such models often remain opaque, limiting their trustworthiness in clinical contexts. This paper investigates an alternative approach based on Explainable AI (XAI), a field that aims to improve the interpretability of DNNs by providing different forms of explanations. Specifically, this works focuses on concept-based models such as Concept Bottleneck Model (CBM) and Concept Embedding Model (CEM) and how they can achieve performance comparable to traditional deep learning methods, while offering a more transparent and interpretable decision framework.

eess.AS↗