Research Papers

As calls for fair and unbiased algorithmic systems increase, so too does the number of individuals working on algorithmic fairness in industry. However, these practitioners often do not have access to the demographic data they feel they need to detect bias in practice. Even with the growing variety of toolkits and strategies for working towards algorithmic fairness, they almost invariably require access to demographic attributes or proxies. We investigated this dilemma through semi-structured interviews with 38 practitioners and professionals either working in or adjacent to algorithmic fairness. Participants painted a complex picture of what demographic data availability and use look like on the ground, ranging from not having access to personal data of any kind to being legally required to collect and use demographic data for discrimination assessments. In many domains, demographic data collection raises a host of difficult questions, including how to balance privacy and fairness, how to define relevant social categories, how to ensure meaningful consent, and whether it is appropriate for private companies to infer someone's demographics. Our research suggests challenges that must be considered by businesses, regulators, researchers, and community groups in order to enable practitioners to address algorithmic bias in practice. Critically, we do not propose that the overall goal of future work should be to simply lower the barriers to collecting demographic data. Rather, our study surfaces a swath of normative questions about how, when, and whether this data should be procured, and, in cases where it is not, what should still be done to mitigate bias.

Recent breakthroughs in natural language processing (NLP) have permitted the synthesis and comprehension of coherent text in an open-ended way, therefore translating the theoretical algorithms into practical applications. The large language models (LLMs) have significantly impacted businesses such as report summarization software and copywriters. Observations indicate, however, that LLMs may exhibit social prejudice and toxicity, posing ethical and societal dangers of consequences resulting from irresponsibility. Large-scale benchmarks for accountable LLMs should consequently be developed. Although several empirical investigations reveal the existence of a few ethical difficulties in advanced LLMs, there is little systematic examination and user study of the risks and harmful behaviors of current LLM usage. To further educate future efforts on constructing ethical LLMs responsibly, we perform a qualitative research method called ``red teaming'' on OpenAI's ChatGPT\footnote{In this paper, ChatGPT refers to the version released on Dec 15th.} to better understand the practical features of ethical dangers in recent LLMs. We analyze ChatGPT comprehensively from four perspectives: 1) \textit{Bias} 2) \textit{Reliability} 3) \textit{Robustness} 4) \textit{Toxicity}. In accordance with our stated viewpoints, we empirically benchmark ChatGPT on multiple sample datasets. We find that a significant number of ethical risks cannot be addressed by existing benchmarks, and hence illustrate them via additional case studies. In addition, we examine the implications of our findings on AI ethics and harmal behaviors of ChatGPT, as well as future problems and practical design considerations for responsible LLMs. We believe that our findings may give light on future efforts to determine and mitigate the ethical hazards posed by machines in LLM applications.

How Different Groups Prioritize Ethical Values for Responsible AI

Maurice Jakesch, Zana Buçinca, Saleema Amershi +1

Private companies, public sector organizations, and academic groups have outlined ethical values they consider important for responsible artificial intelligence technologies. While their recommendations converge on a set of central values, little is known about the values a more representative public would find important for the AI technologies they interact with and might be affected by. We conducted a survey examining how individuals perceive and prioritize responsible AI values across three groups: a representative sample of the US population (N=743), a sample of crowdworkers (N=755), and a sample of AI practitioners (N=175). Our results empirically confirm a common concern: AI practitioners' value priorities differ from those of the general public. Compared to the US-representative sample, AI practitioners appear to consider responsible AI values as less important and emphasize a different set of values. In contrast, self-identified women and black respondents found responsible AI values more important than other groups. Surprisingly, more liberal-leaning participants, rather than participants reporting experiences with discrimination, were more likely to prioritize fairness than other groups. Our findings highlight the importance of paying attention to who gets to define responsible AI.

Despite the immense societal importance of ethically designing artificial intelligence (AI), little research on the public perceptions of ethical AI principles exists. This becomes even more striking when considering that ethical AI development has the aim to be human-centric and of benefit for the whole society. In this study, we investigate how ethical principles (explainability, fairness, security, accountability, accuracy, privacy, machine autonomy) are weighted in comparison to each other. This is especially important, since simultaneously considering ethical principles is not only costly, but sometimes even impossible, as developers must make specific trade-off decisions. In this paper, we give first answers on the relative importance of ethical principles given a specific use case - the use of AI in tax fraud detection. The results of a large conjoint survey (n=1099) suggest that, by and large, German respondents found the ethical principles equally important. However, subsequent cluster analysis shows that different preference models for ethically designed systems exist among the German population. These clusters substantially differ not only in the preferred attributes, but also in the importance level of the attributes themselves. We further describe how these groups are constituted in terms of sociodemographics as well as opinions on AI. Societal implications as well as design challenges are discussed.

Feature importance ranking has become a powerful tool for explainable AI. However, its nature of combinatorial optimization poses a great challenge for deep learning. In this paper, we propose a novel dual-net architecture consisting of operator and selector for discovery of an optimal feature subset of a fixed size and ranking the importance of those features in the optimal subset simultaneously. During learning, the operator is trained for a supervised learning task via optimal feature subset candidates generated by the selector that learns predicting the learning performance of the operator working on different optimal subset candidates. We develop an alternate learning algorithm that trains two nets jointly and incorporates a stochastic local search procedure into learning to address the combinatorial optimization challenge. In deployment, the selector generates an optimal feature subset and ranks feature importance, while the operator makes predictions based on the optimal subset for test data. A thorough evaluation on synthetic, benchmark and real data sets suggests that our approach outperforms several state-of-the-art feature importance ranking and supervised feature selection methods. (Our source code is available: https://github.com/maksym33/FeatureImportanceDL)

Explainable AI for Safe and Trustworthy Autonomous Driving: A Systematic Review

Anton Kuznietsov, Balint Gyevnar, Cheng Wang +2

Artificial Intelligence (AI) shows promising applications for the perception and planning tasks in autonomous driving (AD) due to its superior performance compared to conventional methods. However, inscrutable AI systems exacerbate the existing challenge of safety assurance of AD. One way to mitigate this challenge is to utilize explainable AI (XAI) techniques. To this end, we present the first comprehensive systematic literature review of explainable methods for safe and trustworthy AD. We begin by analyzing the requirements for AI in the context of AD, focusing on three key aspects: data, model, and agency. We find that XAI is fundamental to meeting these requirements. Based on this, we explain the sources of explanations in AI and describe a taxonomy of XAI. We then identify five key contributions of XAI for safe and trustworthy AI in AD, which are interpretable design, interpretable surrogate models, interpretable monitoring, auxiliary explanations, and interpretable validation. Finally, we propose a modular framework called SafeX to integrate these contributions, enabling explanation delivery to users while simultaneously ensuring the safety of AI models.

The success of artificial intelligence (AI), and deep learning models in particular, has led to their widespread adoption across various industries due to their ability to process huge amounts of data and learn complex patterns. However, due to their lack of explainability, there are significant concerns regarding their use in critical sectors, such as finance and healthcare, where decision-making transparency is of paramount importance. In this paper, we provide a comparative survey of methods that aim to improve the explainability of deep learning models within the context of finance. We categorize the collection of explainable AI methods according to their corresponding characteristics, and we review the concerns and challenges of adopting explainable AI methods, together with future directions we deemed appropriate and important.

This article explores the ethical problems arising from the use of ChatGPT as a kind of generative AI and suggests responses based on the Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HCAI) framework. The HCAI framework is appropriate because it understands technology above all as a tool to empower, augment, and enhance human agency while referring to human wellbeing as a grand challenge, thus perfectly aligning itself with ethics, the science of human flourishing. Further, HCAI provides objectives, principles, procedures, and structures for reliable, safe, and trustworthy AI which we apply to our ChatGPT assessments. The main danger ChatGPT presents is the propensity to be used as a weapon of mass deception (WMD) and an enabler of criminal activities involving deceit. We review technical specifications to better comprehend its potentials and limitations. We then suggest both technical (watermarking, styleme, detectors, and fact-checkers) and non-technical measures (terms of use, transparency, educator considerations, HITL) to mitigate ChatGPT misuse or abuse and recommend best uses (creative writing, non-creative writing, teaching and learning). We conclude with considerations regarding the role of humans in ensuring the proper use of ChatGPT for individual and social wellbeing.

AI-Augmented Business Process Management Systems: A Research Manifesto

Marlon Dumas, Fabiana Fournier, Lior Limonad +11

AI-Augmented Business Process Management Systems (ABPMSs) are an emerging class of process-aware information systems, empowered by trustworthy AI technology. An ABPMS enhances the execution of business processes with the aim of making these processes more adaptable, proactive, explainable, and context-sensitive. This manifesto presents a vision for ABPMSs and discusses research challenges that need to be surmounted to realize this vision. To this end, we define the concept of ABPMS, we outline the lifecycle of processes within an ABPMS, we discuss core characteristics of an ABPMS, and we derive a set of challenges to realize systems with these characteristics.

The ethical implications and social impacts of artificial intelligence have become topics of compelling interest to industry, researchers in academia, and the public. However, current analyses of AI in a global context are biased toward perspectives held in the U.S., and limited by a lack of research, especially outside the U.S. and Western Europe. This article summarizes the key findings of a literature review of recent social science scholarship on the social impacts of AI and related technologies in five global regions. Our team of social science researchers reviewed more than 800 academic journal articles and monographs in over a dozen languages. Our review of the literature suggests that AI is likely to have markedly different social impacts depending on geographical setting. Likewise, perceptions and understandings of AI are likely to be profoundly shaped by local cultural and social context. Recent research in U.S. settings demonstrates that AI-driven technologies have a pattern of entrenching social divides and exacerbating social inequality, particularly among historically-marginalized groups. Our literature review indicates that this pattern exists on a global scale, and suggests that low- and middle-income countries may be more vulnerable to the negative social impacts of AI and less likely to benefit from the attendant gains. We call for rigorous ethnographic research to better understand the social impacts of AI around the world. Global, on-the-ground research is particularly critical to identify AI systems that may amplify social inequality in order to mitigate potential harms. Deeper understanding of the social impacts of AI in diverse social settings is a necessary precursor to the development, implementation, and monitoring of responsible and beneficial AI technologies, and forms the basis for meaningful regulation of these technologies.

GLocalX -- From Local to Global Explanations of Black Box AI Models

Mattia Setzu, Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale +3

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has come to prominence as one of the major components of our society, with applications in most aspects of our lives. In this field, complex and highly nonlinear machine learning models such as ensemble models, deep neural networks, and Support Vector Machines have consistently shown remarkable accuracy in solving complex tasks. Although accurate, AI models often are "black boxes" which we are not able to understand. Relying on these models has a multifaceted impact and raises significant concerns about their transparency. Applications in sensitive and critical domains are a strong motivational factor in trying to understand the behavior of black boxes. We propose to address this issue by providing an interpretable layer on top of black box models by aggregating "local" explanations. We present GLocalX, a "local-first" model agnostic explanation method. Starting from local explanations expressed in form of local decision rules, GLocalX iteratively generalizes them into global explanations by hierarchically aggregating them. Our goal is to learn accurate yet simple interpretable models to emulate the given black box, and, if possible, replace it entirely. We validate GLocalX in a set of experiments in standard and constrained settings with limited or no access to either data or local explanations. Experiments show that GLocalX is able to accurately emulate several models with simple and small models, reaching state-of-the-art performance against natively global solutions. Our findings show how it is often possible to achieve a high level of both accuracy and comprehensibility of classification models, even in complex domains with high-dimensional data, without necessarily trading one property for the other. This is a key requirement for a trustworthy AI, necessary for adoption in high-stakes decision making applications.

When it comes to complex machine learning models, commonly referred to as black boxes, understanding the underlying decision making process is crucial for domains such as healthcare and financial services, and also when it is used in connection with safety critical systems such as autonomous vehicles. As such interest in explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) tools and techniques has increased in recent years. However, the effectiveness of existing xAI frameworks, especially concerning algorithms that work with data as opposed to images, is still an open research question. In order to address this gap, in this paper we examine the effectiveness of the Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME) xAI framework, one of the most popular model agnostic frameworks found in the literature, with a specific focus on its performance in terms of making tabular models more interpretable. In particular, we apply several state of the art machine learning algorithms on a tabular dataset, and demonstrate how LIME can be used to supplement conventional performance assessment methods. In addition, we evaluate the understandability of the output produced by LIME both via a usability study, involving participants who are not familiar with LIME, and its overall usability via an assessment framework, which is derived from the International Organisation for Standardisation 9241-11:1998 standard.