Research Papers

Purpose Predicting the progression of MCI to Alzheimer's disease is an important step in reducing the progression of the disease. Therefore, many methods have been introduced for this task based on deep learning. Among these approaches, the methods based on ROIs are in a good position in terms of accuracy and complexity. In these techniques, some specific parts of the brain are extracted as ROI manually for all of the patients. Extracting ROI manually is time-consuming and its results depend on human expertness and precision. Method To overcome these limitations, we propose a novel smart method for detecting ROIs automatically based on Explainable AI using Grad-Cam and a 3DCNN model that extracts ROIs per patient. After extracting the ROIs automatically, Alzheimer's disease is predicted using extracted ROI-based 3D CNN. Results We implement our method on 176 MCI patients of the famous ADNI dataset and obtain remarkable results compared to the state-of-the-art methods. The accuracy acquired using 5-fold cross-validation is 98.6 and the AUC is 1. We also compare the results of the ROI-based method with the whole brain-based method. The results show that the performance is impressively increased. Conclusion The experimental results show that the proposed smart ROI extraction, which extracts the ROIs automatically, performs well for Alzheimer's disease prediction. The proposed method can also be used for Alzheimer's disease classification and diagnosis.

In this expository article we highlight the relevance of explanations for artificial intelligence, in general, and for the newer developments in {\em explainable AI}, referring to origins and connections of and among different approaches. We describe in simple terms, explanations in data management and machine learning that are based on attribution-scores, and counterfactuals as found in the area of causality. We elaborate on the importance of logical reasoning when dealing with counterfactuals, and their use for score computation.

As security communities brace for the emerging social automation based threats, we examine the mechanisms of developing situation awareness in cyberspace and the governance issues that socialbots bring into this existing paradigm of cyber situation awareness. We point out that an organisation's situation awareness in cyberspace is a phenomena fundamentally distinct from the original conception of situation awareness, requiring continuous data exchange and knowledge management where the standard implementation mechanisms require significant policy attention in light of threats like malicious social automation. We conceptualise Cyberspace Awareness as a socio-technical phenomena with Syntactic, Semantic, and Operatic dimensions - each subject to a number of stressors which are exacerbated under social automation based threats. The paper contributes to the ideas of situational awareness in cyberspace, and characterises the challenges therein around tackling the increasingly social and often pervasive, automation in cyber threat environments.

The lack of established rules and regulations in cyberspace is attributed to the absence of agreed-upon ethical principles, making it difficult to establish accountability, regulations, and laws. Addressing this challenge requires examining cyberspace from fundamental philosophical principles. This work focuses on the ethics of using defensive deception in cyberspace, proposing a doctrine of cyber effect that incorporates five ethical principles: goodwill, deontology, no-harm, transparency, and fairness. To guide the design of defensive cyber deception, we develop a reasoning framework, the game of ethical duplicity, which is consistent with the doctrine. While originally intended for cyber deception, this doctrine has broader applicability, including for ethical issues such as AI accountability and controversies related to YouTube recommendations. By establishing ethical principles, we can promote greater accountability, regulation, and protection in the digital realm.

AI ethics is an emerging field with multiple, competing narratives about how to best solve the problem of building human values into machines. Two major approaches are focused on bias and compliance, respectively. But neither of these ideas fully encompasses ethics: using moral principles to decide how to act in a particular situation. Our method posits that the way data is labeled plays an essential role in the way AI behaves, and therefore in the ethics of machines themselves. The argument combines a fundamental insight from ethics (i.e. that ethics is about values) with our practical experience building and scaling machine learning systems. We want to build AI that is actually ethical by first addressing foundational concerns: how to build good systems, how to define what is good in relation to system architecture, and who should provide that definition. Building ethical AI creates a foundation of trust between a company and the users of that platform. But this trust is unjustified unless users experience the direct value of ethical AI. Until users have real control over how algorithms behave, something is missing in current AI solutions. This causes massive distrust in AI, and apathy towards AI ethics solutions. The scope of this paper is to propose an alternative path that allows for the plurality of values and the freedom of individual expression. Both are essential for realizing true moral character.

With the increased usage of artificial intelligence (AI), it is imperative to understand how these models work internally. These needs have led to the development of a new field called eXplainable artificial intelligence (XAI). This field consists of on a set of techniques that allows us to theoretically determine the cause of the AI decisions. One main issue of XAI is how to verify the works on this field, taking into consideration the lack of ground truth (GT). In this study, we propose a new method to generate datasets with GT. We conducted a set of experiments that compared our GT with real model explanations and obtained excellent results confirming that our proposed method is correct.

GCI: A (G)raph (C)oncept (I)nterpretation Framework

Dmitry Kazhdan, Botty Dimanov, Lucie Charlotte Magister +3

Explainable AI (XAI) underwent a recent surge in research on concept extraction, focusing on extracting human-interpretable concepts from Deep Neural Networks. An important challenge facing concept extraction approaches is the difficulty of interpreting and evaluating discovered concepts, especially for complex tasks such as molecular property prediction. We address this challenge by presenting GCI: a (G)raph (C)oncept (I)nterpretation framework, used for quantitatively measuring alignment between concepts discovered from Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) and their corresponding human interpretations. GCI encodes concept interpretations as functions, which can be used to quantitatively measure the alignment between a given interpretation and concept definition. We demonstrate four applications of GCI: (i) quantitatively evaluating concept extractors, (ii) measuring alignment between concept extractors and human interpretations, (iii) measuring the completeness of interpretations with respect to an end task and (iv) a practical application of GCI to molecular property prediction, in which we demonstrate how to use chemical functional groups to explain GNNs trained on molecular property prediction tasks, and implement interpretations with a 0.76 AUCROC completeness score.

We present Azimuth, an open-source and easy-to-use tool to perform error analysis for text classification. Compared to other stages of the ML development cycle, such as model training and hyper-parameter tuning, the process and tooling for the error analysis stage are less mature. However, this stage is critical for the development of reliable and trustworthy AI systems. To make error analysis more systematic, we propose an approach comprising dataset analysis and model quality assessment, which Azimuth facilitates. We aim to help AI practitioners discover and address areas where the model does not generalize by leveraging and integrating a range of ML techniques, such as saliency maps, similarity, uncertainty, and behavioral analyses, all in one tool. Our code and documentation are available at github.com/servicenow/azimuth.

Explainable artificial intelligence is an emerging and evolving concept. Its impact on construction, though yet to be realised, will be profound in the foreseeable future. Still, XAI has received limited attention in construction. As a result, no evaluation frameworks have been propagated to enable construction organisations to understand the what, why, how, and when of XAI. Our paper aims to fill this void by developing a content, context, process, and outcome evaluation framework that can be used to justify the adoption and effective management of XAI. After introducing and describing this novel framework, we discuss its implications for future research. While our novel framework is conceptual, it provides a frame of reference for construction organisations to make headway toward realising XAI business value and benefits.

Several approaches have been developed to mitigate algorithmic bias stemming from health data poverty, where minority groups are underrepresented in training datasets. Augmenting the minority class using resampling (such as SMOTE) is a widely used approach due to the simplicity of the algorithms. However, these algorithms decrease data variability and may introduce correlations between samples, giving rise to the use of generative approaches based on GAN. Generation of high-dimensional, time-series, authentic data that provides a wide distribution coverage of the real data, remains a challenging task for both resampling and GAN-based approaches. In this work we propose CA-GAN architecture that addresses some of the shortcomings of the current approaches, where we provide a detailed comparison with both SMOTE and WGAN-GP*, using a high-dimensional, time-series, real dataset of 3343 hypotensive Caucasian and Black patients. We show that our approach is better at both generating authentic data of the minority class and remaining within the original distribution of the real data.

Evaluating Search System Explainability with Psychometrics and Crowdsourcing

Catherine Chen, Carsten Eickhoff

As information retrieval (IR) systems, such as search engines and conversational agents, become ubiquitous in various domains, the need for transparent and explainable systems grows to ensure accountability, fairness, and unbiased results. Despite recent advances in explainable AI and IR techniques, there is no consensus on the definition of explainability. Existing approaches often treat it as a singular notion, disregarding the multidimensional definition postulated in the literature. In this paper, we use psychometrics and crowdsourcing to identify human-centered factors of explainability in Web search systems and introduce SSE (Search System Explainability), an evaluation metric for explainable IR (XIR) search systems. In a crowdsourced user study, we demonstrate SSE's ability to distinguish between explainable and non-explainable systems, showing that systems with higher scores indeed indicate greater interpretability. We hope that aside from these concrete contributions to XIR, this line of work will serve as a blueprint for similar explainability evaluation efforts in other domains of machine learning and natural language processing.

Banks hold a societal responsibility and regulatory requirements to mitigate the risk of financial crimes. Risk mitigation primarily happens through monitoring customer activity through Transaction Monitoring (TM). Recently, Machine Learning (ML) has been proposed to identify suspicious customer behavior, which raises complex socio-technical implications around trust and explainability of ML models and their outputs. However, little research is available due to its sensitivity. We aim to fill this gap by presenting empirical research exploring how ML supported automation and augmentation affects the TM process and stakeholders' requirements for building eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (xAI). Our study finds that xAI requirements depend on the liable party in the TM process which changes depending on augmentation or automation of TM. Context-relatable explanations can provide much-needed support for auditing and may diminish bias in the investigator's judgement. These results suggest a use case-specific approach for xAI to adequately foster the adoption of ML in TM.