Research Papers

LLM-Agent-UMF: LLM-based Agent Unified Modeling Framework for Seamless Design of Multi Active/Passive Core-Agent Architectures

Amine Ben Hassouna, Hana Chaari, Ines Belhaj

In an era where vast amounts of data are collected and processed from diverse sources, there is a growing demand for sophisticated AI systems capable of intelligently fusing and analyzing this information. To address these challenges, researchers have turned towards integrating tools into LLM-powered agents to enhance the overall information fusion process. However, the conjunction of these technologies and the proposed enhancements in several state-of-the-art works followed a non-unified software architecture, resulting in a lack of modularity and terminological inconsistencies among researchers. To address these issues, we propose a novel LLM-based Agent Unified Modeling Framework (LLM-Agent-UMF) that establishes a clear foundation for agent development from both functional and software architectural perspectives, developed and evaluated using the Architecture Tradeoff and Risk Analysis Framework (ATRAF). Our framework clearly distinguishes between the different components of an LLM-based agent, setting LLMs and tools apart from a new element, the core-agent, which plays the role of central coordinator. This pivotal entity comprises five modules: planning, memory, profile, action, and security -- the latter often neglected in previous works. By classifying core-agents into passive and active types based on their authoritative natures, we propose various multi-core agent architectures that combine unique characteristics of distinctive agents to tackle complex tasks more efficiently. We evaluate our framework by applying it to thirteen state-of-the-art agents, thereby demonstrating its alignment with their functionalities and clarifying overlooked architectural aspects. Moreover, we thoroughly assess five architecture variants of our framework by designing new agent architectures that combine characteristics of state-of-the-art agents to address specific goals. ...

Deep learning-based face recognition (FR) systems pose significant privacy risks by tracking users without their consent. While adversarial attacks can protect privacy, they often produce visible artifacts compromising user experience. To mitigate this issue, recent facial privacy protection approaches advocate embedding adversarial noise into the natural looking makeup styles. However, these methods require training on large-scale makeup datasets that are not always readily available. In addition, these approaches also suffer from dataset bias. For instance, training on makeup data that predominantly contains female faces could compromise protection efficacy for male faces. To handle these issues, we propose a test-time optimization approach that solely optimizes an untrained neural network to transfer makeup style from a reference to a source image in an adversarial manner. We introduce two key modules: a correspondence module that aligns regions between reference and source images in latent space, and a decoder with conditional makeup layers. The untrained decoder, optimized via carefully designed structural and makeup consistency losses, generates a protected image that resembles the source but incorporates adversarial makeup to deceive FR models. As our approach does not rely on training with makeup face datasets, it avoids potential male/female dataset biases while providing effective protection. We further extend the proposed approach to videos by leveraging on temporal correlations. Experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate superior performance in face verification and identification tasks and effectiveness against commercial FR systems. Our code and models will be available at https://github.com/fahadshamshad/deep-facial-privacy-prior

Evaluating Explainable AI Methods in Deep Learning Models for Early Detection of Cerebral Palsy

Kimji N. Pellano, Inga Strümke, Daniel Groos +2

Early detection of Cerebral Palsy (CP) is crucial for effective intervention and monitoring. This paper tests the reliability and applicability of Explainable AI (XAI) methods using a deep learning method that predicts CP by analyzing skeletal data extracted from video recordings of infant movements. Specifically, we use XAI evaluation metrics -- namely faithfulness and stability -- to quantitatively assess the reliability of Class Activation Mapping (CAM) and Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) in this specific medical application. We utilize a unique dataset of infant movements and apply skeleton data perturbations without distorting the original dynamics of the infant movements. Our CP prediction model utilizes an ensemble approach, so we evaluate the XAI metrics performances for both the overall ensemble and the individual models. Our findings indicate that both XAI methods effectively identify key body points influencing CP predictions and that the explanations are robust against minor data perturbations. Grad-CAM significantly outperforms CAM in the RISv metric, which measures stability in terms of velocity. In contrast, CAM performs better in the RISb metric, which relates to bone stability, and the RRS metric, which assesses internal representation robustness. Individual models within the ensemble show varied results, and neither CAM nor Grad-CAM consistently outperform the other, with the ensemble approach providing a representation of outcomes from its constituent models.

Observers and practitioners of artificial intelligence (AI) have proposed an FDA-style licensing regime for the most advanced AI models, or 'frontier' models. In this paper, we explore the applicability of approval regulation -- that is, regulation of a product that combines experimental minima with government licensure conditioned partially or fully upon that experimentation -- to the regulation of frontier AI. There are a number of reasons to believe that approval regulation, simplistically applied, would be inapposite for frontier AI risks. Domains of weak fit include the difficulty of defining the regulated product, the presence of Knightian uncertainty or deep ambiguity about harms from AI, the potentially transmissible nature of risks, and distributed activities among actors involved in the AI lifecycle. We conclude by highlighting the role of policy learning and experimentation in regulatory development, describing how learning from other forms of AI regulation and improvements in evaluation and testing methods can help to overcome some of the challenges we identify.

Algorithmic discrimination is a critical concern as machine learning models are used in high-stakes decision-making in legally protected contexts. Although substantial research on algorithmic bias and discrimination has led to the development of fairness metrics, several critical legal issues remain unaddressed in practice. The paper addresses three key shortcomings in prevailing ML fairness paradigms: (1) the narrow reliance on prediction or outcome disparity as evidence for discrimination, (2) the lack of nuanced evaluation of estimation error and assumptions that the true causal structure and data-generating process are known, and (3) the overwhelming dominance of US-based analyses which has inadvertently fostered some misconceptions regarding lawful modelling practices in other jurisdictions. To address these gaps, we introduce a novel decision-theoretic framework grounded in anti-discrimination law of the United Kingdom, which has global influence and aligns closely with European and Commonwealth legal systems. We propose the "conditional estimation parity" metric, which accounts for estimation error and the underlying data-generating process, aligning with UK legal standards. We apply our formalism to a real-world algorithmic discrimination case, demonstrating how technical and legal reasoning can be aligned to detect and mitigate unlawful discrimination. Our contributions offer actionable, legally-grounded guidance for ML practitioners, policymakers, and legal scholars seeking to develop non-discriminatory automated decision systems that are legally robust.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods help to understand the internal mechanism of machine learning models and how they reach a specific decision or made a specific action. The list of informative features is one of the most common output of XAI methods. Multicollinearity is one of the big issue that should be considered when XAI generates the explanation in terms of the most informative features in an AI system. No review has been dedicated to investigate the current approaches to handle such significant issue. In this paper, we provide a review of the current state-of-the-art approaches in relation to the XAI in the context of recent advances in dealing with the multicollinearity issue. To do so, we searched in three repositories that are: Web of Science, Scopus and IEEE Xplore to find pertinent published papers. After excluding irrelevant papers, seven papers were considered in the review. In addition, we discuss the current XAI methods and their limitations in dealing with the multicollinearity and suggest future directions.

Are language models rational? The case of coherence norms and belief revision

Thomas Hofweber, Peter Hase, Elias Stengel-Eskin +1

Do norms of rationality apply to machine learning models, in particular language models? In this paper we investigate this question by focusing on a special subset of rational norms: coherence norms. We consider both logical coherence norms as well as coherence norms tied to the strength of belief. To make sense of the latter, we introduce the Minimal Assent Connection (MAC) and propose a new account of credence, which captures the strength of belief in language models. This proposal uniformly assigns strength of belief simply on the basis of model internal next token probabilities. We argue that rational norms tied to coherence do apply to some language models, but not to others. This issue is significant since rationality is closely tied to predicting and explaining behavior, and thus it is connected to considerations about AI safety and alignment, as well as understanding model behavior more generally.

Data is critical to advancing AI technologies, yet its quality and documentation remain significant challenges, leading to adverse downstream effects (e.g., potential biases) in AI applications. This paper addresses these issues by introducing Croissant-RAI, a machine-readable metadata format designed to enhance the discoverability, interoperability, and trustworthiness of AI datasets. Croissant-RAI extends the Croissant metadata format and builds upon existing responsible AI (RAI) documentation frameworks, offering a standardized set of attributes and practices to facilitate community-wide adoption. Leveraging established web-publishing practices, such as Schema.org, Croissant-RAI enables dataset users to easily find and utilize RAI metadata regardless of the platform on which the datasets are published. Furthermore, it is seamlessly integrated into major data search engines, repositories, and machine learning frameworks, streamlining the reading and writing of responsible AI metadata within practitioners' existing workflows. Croissant-RAI was developed through a community-led effort. It has been designed to be adaptable to evolving documentation requirements and is supported by a Python library and a visual editor.

Recent advancements in technology have led to the emergence of Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), which seamlessly integrate the cyber and physical domains in various sectors such as agriculture, autonomous systems, and healthcare. This integration presents opportunities for enhanced efficiency and automation through the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). However, the complexity of CPS brings forth challenges related to transparency, bias, and trust in AI-enabled decision-making processes. This research explores the significance of AI and ML in enabling CPS in these domains and addresses the challenges associated with interpreting and trusting AI systems within CPS. Specifically, the role of explainable AI (XAI) in enhancing trustworthiness and reliability in AI-enabled decision-making processes is discussed. Key challenges such as transparency, security, and privacy are identified, along with the necessity of building trust through transparency, accountability, and ethical considerations.

Nasogastric tubes (NGTs) are feeding tubes that are inserted through the nose into the stomach to deliver nutrition or medication. If not placed correctly, they can cause serious harm, even death to patients. Recent AI developments demonstrate the feasibility of robustly detecting NGT placement from Chest X-ray images to reduce risks of sub-optimally or critically placed NGTs being missed or delayed in their detection, but gaps remain in clinical practice integration. In this study, we present a human-centered approach to the problem and describe insights derived following contextual inquiry and in-depth interviews with 15 clinical stakeholders. The interviews helped understand challenges in existing workflows, and how best to align technical capabilities with user needs and expectations. We discovered the trade-offs and complexities that need consideration when choosing suitable workflow stages, target users, and design configurations for different AI proposals. We explored how to balance AI benefits and risks for healthcare staff and patients within broader organizational and medical-legal constraints. We also identified data issues related to edge cases and data biases that affect model training and evaluation; how data documentation practices influence data preparation and labelling; and how to measure relevant AI outcomes reliably in future evaluations. We discuss how our work informs design and development of AI applications that are clinically useful, ethical, and acceptable in real-world healthcare services.

A cautious interpretation of AI regulations and policy in the EU and the USA place explainability as a central deliverable of compliant AI systems. However, from a technical perspective, explainable AI (XAI) remains an elusive and complex target where even state of the art methods often reach erroneous, misleading, and incomplete explanations. "Explainability" has multiple meanings which are often used interchangeably, and there are an even greater number of XAI methods - none of which presents a clear edge. Indeed, there are multiple failure modes for each XAI method, which require application-specific development and continuous evaluation. In this paper, we analyze legislative and policy developments in the United States and the European Union, such as the Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, the AI Act, the AI Liability Directive, and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) from a right to explanation perspective. We argue that these AI regulations and current market conditions threaten effective AI governance and safety because the objective of trustworthy, accountable, and transparent AI is intrinsically linked to the questionable ability of AI operators to provide meaningful explanations. Unless governments explicitly tackle the issue of explainability through clear legislative and policy statements that take into account technical realities, AI governance risks becoming a vacuous "box-ticking" exercise where scientific standards are replaced with legalistic thresholds, providing only a false sense of security in XAI.

The recent prevalence of publicly accessible, large medical imaging datasets has led to a proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) models for cardiovascular image classification and analysis. At the same time, the potentially significant impacts of these models have motivated the development of a range of explainable AI (XAI) methods that aim to explain model predictions given certain image inputs. However, many of these methods are not developed or evaluated with domain experts, and explanations are not contextualized in terms of medical expertise or domain knowledge. In this paper, we propose a novel framework and python library, MiMICRI, that provides domain-centered counterfactual explanations of cardiovascular image classification models. MiMICRI helps users interactively select and replace segments of medical images that correspond to morphological structures. From the counterfactuals generated, users can then assess the influence of each segment on model predictions, and validate the model against known medical facts. We evaluate this library with two medical experts. Our evaluation demonstrates that a domain-centered XAI approach can enhance the interpretability of model explanations, and help experts reason about models in terms of relevant domain knowledge. However, concerns were also surfaced about the clinical plausibility of the counterfactuals generated. We conclude with a discussion on the generalizability and trustworthiness of the MiMICRI framework, as well as the implications of our findings on the development of domain-centered XAI methods for model interpretability in healthcare contexts.