Research Papers

Generative artificial intelligence is increasingly transforming education by enabling adaptive learning environments, personalized instructional support, and collaborative knowledge creation, while also assisting research, assessment, and academic administration. In the context of fifth generation education systems, the integration of generative artificial intelligence offers new opportunities to enhance student engagement, support innovative pedagogical practices, and improve scholarly productivity. This study presents a systematic review of recent research on the adoption of generative artificial intelligence in primary, secondary, and higher education institutions, using established guidelines for systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analysis. The review examines applications of generative artificial intelligence for learners, educators, and researchers, and identifies key challenges including academic integrity risks, algorithmic bias, ethical concerns, data privacy issues, and unequal access to advanced educational technologies. By analyzing research trends, thematic relationships, and existing gaps, this study provides insights for the design of adaptive learning systems, the promotion of responsible use of artificial intelligence in education, and the direction of future research efforts. Overall, the findings highlight the potential of generative artificial intelligence to support human machine collaboration, lifelong learning, and inclusive educational environments, offering practical guidance for policymakers, educators, and engineers seeking to apply artificial intelligence for meaningful educational impact.

Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used for personnel assessment and selection (e.g., resume screeners, automatically scored interviews). However, concerns have been raised throughout society that ML assessments may be biased and perpetuate or exacerbate inequality. Although organizational researchers have begun investigating ML assessments from traditional psychometric and legal perspectives, there is a need to understand, clarify, and integrate fairness operationalizations and algorithmic bias mitigation methods from the computer science, data science, and organizational research literatures. We present a four-stage model of developing ML assessments and applying bias mitigation methods, including 1) generating the training data, 2) training the model, 3) testing the model, and 4) deploying the model. When introducing the four-stage model, we describe potential sources of bias and unfairness at each stage. Then, we systematically review definitions and operationalizations of algorithmic bias, legal requirements governing personnel selection from the United States and Europe, and research on algorithmic bias mitigation across multiple domains and integrate these findings into our framework. Our review provides insights for both research and practice by elucidating possible mechanisms of algorithmic bias while identifying which bias mitigation methods are legal and effective. This integrative framework also reveals gaps in the knowledge of algorithmic bias mitigation that should be addressed by future collaborative research between organizational researchers, computer scientists, and data scientists. We provide recommendations for developing and deploying ML assessments, as well as recommendations for future research into algorithmic bias and fairness.

The integration of Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) into military operations presents both significant opportunities and challenges. This paper explores the multifaceted nature of trust in AWS, emphasising the necessity of establishing reliable and transparent systems to mitigate risks associated with bias, operational failures, and accountability. Despite advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI), the trustworthiness of these systems, especially in high-stakes military applications, remains a critical issue. Through a systematic review of existing literature, this research identifies gaps in the understanding of trust dynamics during the development and deployment phases of AWS. It advocates for a collaborative approach that includes technologists, ethicists, and military strategists to address these ongoing challenges. The findings underscore the importance of Human-Machine teaming and enhancing system intelligibility to ensure accountability and adherence to International Humanitarian Law. Ultimately, this paper aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on the ethical implications of AWS and the imperative for trustworthy AI in defense contexts.

Artificial Intelligence is currently and rapidly changing the way organizations and businesses operate. Ethical leadership has become significantly important since organizations and businesses across various sectors are evolving with AI. Organizations and businesses may be facing several challenges and potential opportunities when using AI. Ethical leadership plays a central role in guiding organizations in facing those challenges and maximizing on those opportunities. This article explores the essence of ethical leadership in the age of AI, starting with a simplified introduction of ethical leadership and AI, then dives into an understanding of ethical leadership, its characteristics and importance, the ethical challenges AI causes including bias in AI algorithms. The opportunities for ethical leadership in the age of AI answers the question: What actionable strategies can leaders employ to address the challenges and leverage opportunities? and describes the benefits for organizations through these opportunities. A proposed framework for ethical leadership is presented in this article, incorporating the core components: fairness, transparency, sustainability etc. Through the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration, case studies of ethical leadership in AI, and recommendations, this article emphasizes that ethical leadership in the age of AI is morally essential and strategically advantageous.

Can Models Learn Skill Composition from Examples?

Haoyu Zhao, Simran Kaur, Dingli Yu +2

As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly advanced, their ability to exhibit compositional generalization -- the capacity to combine learned skills in novel ways not encountered during training -- has garnered significant attention. This type of generalization, particularly in scenarios beyond training data, is also of great interest in the study of AI safety and alignment. A recent study introduced the SKILL-MIX evaluation, where models are tasked with composing a short paragraph demonstrating the use of a specified $k$-tuple of language skills. While small models struggled with composing even with $k=3$, larger models like GPT-4 performed reasonably well with $k=5$ and $6$. In this paper, we employ a setup akin to SKILL-MIX to evaluate the capacity of smaller models to learn compositional generalization from examples. Utilizing a diverse set of language skills -- including rhetorical, literary, reasoning, theory of mind, and common sense -- GPT-4 was used to generate text samples that exhibit random subsets of $k$ skills. Subsequent fine-tuning of 7B and 13B parameter models on these combined skill texts, for increasing values of $k$, revealed the following findings: (1) Training on combinations of $k=2$ and $3$ skills results in noticeable improvements in the ability to compose texts with $k=4$ and $5$ skills, despite models never having seen such examples during training. (2) When skill categories are split into training and held-out groups, models significantly improve at composing texts with held-out skills during testing despite having only seen training skills during fine-tuning, illustrating the efficacy of the training approach even with previously unseen skills. This study also suggests that incorporating skill-rich (potentially synthetic) text into training can substantially enhance the compositional capabilities of models.

Concept-Based Explanations in Computer Vision: Where Are We and Where Could We Go?

Jae Hee Lee, Georgii Mikriukov, Gesina Schwalbe +2

Concept-based XAI (C-XAI) approaches to explaining neural vision models are a promising field of research, since explanations that refer to concepts (i.e., semantically meaningful parts in an image) are intuitive to understand and go beyond saliency-based techniques that only reveal relevant regions. Given the remarkable progress in this field in recent years, it is time for the community to take a critical look at the advances and trends. Consequently, this paper reviews C-XAI methods to identify interesting and underexplored areas and proposes future research directions. To this end, we consider three main directions: the choice of concepts to explain, the choice of concept representation, and how we can control concepts. For the latter, we propose techniques and draw inspiration from the field of knowledge representation and learning, showing how this could enrich future C-XAI research.

Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), particularly in large language models (LLMs), have unlocked significant potential to enhance the quality and efficiency of medical care. By introducing a novel way to interact with AI and data through natural language, LLMs offer new opportunities for medical practitioners, patients, and researchers. However, as AI and LLMs become more powerful and especially achieve superhuman performance in some medical tasks, public concerns over their safety have intensified. These concerns about AI safety have emerged as the most significant obstacles to the adoption of AI in medicine. In response, this review examines emerging risks in AI utilization during the LLM era. First, we explore LLM-specific safety challenges from functional and communication perspectives, addressing issues across data collection, model training, and real-world application. We then consider inherent safety problems shared by all AI systems, along with additional complications introduced by LLMs. Last, we discussed how safety issues of using AI in clinical practice and healthcare system operation would undermine trust among patient, clinicians and the public, and how to build confidence in these systems. By emphasizing the development of safe AI, we believe these technologies can be more rapidly and reliably integrated into everyday medical practice to benefit both patients and clinicians.

This paper explores the ethical implications of integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) in educational settings, from primary schools to universities, while drawing insights from ancient Greek philosophy to address emerging concerns. As AI technologies increasingly influence learning environments, they offer novel opportunities for personalized learning, efficient assessment, and data-driven decision-making. However, these advancements also raise critical ethical questions regarding data privacy, algorithmic bias, student autonomy, and the changing roles of educators. This research examines specific use cases of AI in education, analyzing both their potential benefits and drawbacks. By revisiting the philosophical principles of ancient Greek thinkers such as Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato, we discuss how their writings can guide the ethical implementation of AI in modern education. The paper argues that while AI presents significant challenges, a balanced approach informed by classical philosophical thought can lead to an ethically sound transformation of education. It emphasizes the evolving role of teachers as facilitators and the importance of fostering student initiative in AI-rich environments.

The rapid advancement of foundation models in medical imaging represents a significant leap toward enhancing diagnostic accuracy and personalized treatment. However, the deployment of foundation models in healthcare necessitates a rigorous examination of their trustworthiness, encompassing privacy, robustness, reliability, explainability, and fairness. The current body of survey literature on foundation models in medical imaging reveals considerable gaps, particularly in the area of trustworthiness. Additionally, existing surveys on the trustworthiness of foundation models do not adequately address their specific variations and applications within the medical imaging domain. This survey aims to fill that gap by presenting a novel taxonomy of foundation models used in medical imaging and analyzing the key motivations for ensuring their trustworthiness. We review current research on foundation models in major medical imaging applications, focusing on segmentation, medical report generation, medical question and answering (Q\&A), and disease diagnosis. These areas are highlighted because they have seen a relatively mature and substantial number of foundation models compared to other applications. We focus on literature that discusses trustworthiness in medical image analysis manuscripts. We explore the complex challenges of building trustworthy foundation models for each application, summarizing current concerns and strategies for enhancing trustworthiness. Furthermore, we examine the potential of these models to revolutionize patient care. Our analysis underscores the imperative for advancing towards trustworthy AI in medical image analysis, advocating for a balanced approach that fosters innovation while ensuring ethical and equitable healthcare delivery.

From SHAP Scores to Feature Importance Scores

Olivier Letoffe, Xuanxiang Huang, Nicholas Asher +1

A central goal of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is to assign relative importance to the features of a Machine Learning (ML) model given some prediction. The importance of this task of explainability by feature attribution is illustrated by the ubiquitous recent use of tools such as SHAP and LIME. Unfortunately, the exact computation of feature attributions, using the game-theoretical foundation underlying SHAP and LIME, can yield manifestly unsatisfactory results, that tantamount to reporting misleading relative feature importance. Recent work targeted rigorous feature attribution, by studying axiomatic aggregations of features based on logic-based definitions of explanations by feature selection. This paper shows that there is an essential relationship between feature attribution and a priori voting power, and that those recently proposed axiomatic aggregations represent a few instantiations of the range of power indices studied in the past. Furthermore, it remains unclear how some of the most widely used power indices might be exploited as feature importance scores (FISs), i.e. the use of power indices in XAI, and which of these indices would be the best suited for the purposes of XAI by feature attribution, namely in terms of not producing results that could be deemed as unsatisfactory. This paper proposes novel desirable properties that FISs should exhibit. In addition, the paper also proposes novel FISs exhibiting the proposed properties. Finally, the paper conducts a rigorous analysis of the best-known power indices in terms of the proposed properties.

This study developed an explainable AI for ship collision avoidance. Initially, a critic network composed of sub-task critic networks was proposed to individually evaluate each sub-task in collision avoidance to clarify the AI decision-making processes involved. Additionally, an attempt was made to discern behavioral intentions through a Q-value analysis and an Attention mechanism. The former focused on interpreting intentions by examining the increment of the Q-value resulting from AI actions, while the latter incorporated the significance of other ships in the decision-making process for collision avoidance into the learning objective. AI's behavioral intentions in collision avoidance were visualized by combining the perceived collision danger with the degree of attention to other ships. The proposed method was evaluated through a numerical experiment. The developed AI was confirmed to be able to safely avoid collisions under various congestion levels, and AI's decision-making process was rendered comprehensible to humans. The proposed method not only facilitates the understanding of DRL-based controllers/systems in the ship collision avoidance task but also extends to any task comprising sub-tasks.

This paper presents a critical, qualitative study of the social role of algorithmic bias in the context of the Chicago crime prediction algorithm, a predictive policing tool that forecasts when and where in the city crime is most likely to occur. Through interviews with 18 Chicago-area community organizations, academic researchers, and public sector actors, we show that stakeholders from different groups articulate diverse problem diagnoses of the tool's algorithmic bias, strategically using it as evidence to advance criminal justice interventions that align with stakeholders' positionality and political ends. Drawing inspiration from Catherine D'Ignazio's taxonomy of "refusing and using" data, we find that stakeholders use evidence of algorithmic bias to reform the policies around police patrol allocation; reject algorithm-based policing interventions; reframe crime as a structural rather than interpersonal problem; reveal data on authority figures in an effort to subvert their power; repair and heal families and communities; and, in the case of more powerful actors, to reaffirm their own authority or existing power structures. We identify the implicit assumptions and scope of these varied uses of algorithmic bias as evidence, showing that they require different (and sometimes conflicting) values about policing and AI. This divergence reflects long-standing tensions in the criminal justice reform landscape between the values of liberation and healing often centered by system-impacted communities and the values of surveillance and deterrence often instantiated in data-driven reform measures. We advocate for centering the interests and experiential knowledge of communities impacted by incarceration to ensure that evidence of algorithmic bias can serve as a device to challenge the status quo.