Research Papers

We introduce VERA-MH (Validation of Ethical and Responsible AI in Mental Health), an automated evaluation of the safety of AI chatbots used in mental health contexts, with an initial focus on suicide risk. Practicing clinicians and academic experts developed a rubric informed by best practices for suicide risk management for the evaluation. To fully automate the process, we used two ancillary AI agents. A user-agent model simulates users engaging in a mental health-based conversation with the chatbot under evaluation. The user-agent role-plays specific personas with pre-defined risk levels and other features. Simulated conversations are then passed to a judge-agent who scores them based on the rubric. The final evaluation of the chatbot being tested is obtained by aggregating the scoring of each conversation. VERA-MH is actively under development and undergoing rigorous validation by mental health clinicians to ensure user-agents realistically act as patients and that the judge-agent accurately scores the AI chatbot. To date we have conducted preliminary evaluation of GPT-5, Claude Opus and Claude Sonnet using initial versions of the VERA-MH rubric and used the findings for further design development. Next steps will include more robust clinical validation and iteration, as well as refining actionable scoring. We are seeking feedback from the community on both the technical and clinical aspects of our evaluation.

We present CAIA, a benchmark exposing a critical blind spot in AI evaluation: the inability of state-of-the-art models to operate in adversarial, high-stakes environments where misinformation is weaponized and errors are irreversible. While existing benchmarks measure task completion in controlled settings, real-world deployment demands resilience against active deception. Using crypto markets as a testbed where $30 billion was lost to exploits in 2024, we evaluate 17 models on 178 time-anchored tasks requiring agents to distinguish truth from manipulation, navigate fragmented information landscapes, and make irreversible financial decisions under adversarial pressure. Our results reveal a fundamental capability gap: without tools, even frontier models achieve only 28% accuracy on tasks junior analysts routinely handle. Tool augmentation improves performance but plateaus at 67.4% versus 80% human baseline, despite unlimited access to professional resources. Most critically, we uncover a systematic tool selection catastrophe: models preferentially choose unreliable web search over authoritative data, falling for SEO-optimized misinformation and social media manipulation. This behavior persists even when correct answers are directly accessible through specialized tools, suggesting foundational limitations rather than knowledge gaps. We also find that Pass@k metrics mask dangerous trial-and-error behavior for autonomous deployment. The implications extend beyond crypto to any domain with active adversaries, e.g. cybersecurity, content moderation, etc. We release CAIA with contamination controls and continuous updates, establishing adversarial robustness as a necessary condition for trustworthy AI autonomy. The benchmark reveals that current models, despite impressive reasoning scores, remain fundamentally unprepared for environments where intelligence must survive active opposition.

AI companies increasingly develop and deploy privacy-enhancing technologies, bias-constraining measures, evaluation frameworks, and alignment techniques -- framing them as addressing concerns related to data privacy, algorithmic fairness, and AI safety. This paper examines the ulterior function of these technologies as mechanisms of legal influence. First, we examine how encryption, federated learning, and synthetic data -- presented as enhancing privacy and reducing bias -- can operate as mechanisms of avoidance with existing regulations in attempts to place data operations outside the scope of traditional regulatory frameworks. Second, we investigate how emerging AI safety practices including open-source model releases, evaluations, and alignment techniques can be used as mechanisms of change that direct regulatory focus towards industry-controlled voluntary standards and self-governance. We term this phenomenon "anti-regulatory AI" -- the deployment of ostensibly protective technologies that simultaneously shapes the terms of regulatory oversight. Our analysis additionally reveals how technologies' anti-regulatory functions are enabled through framing that legitimizes their deployment while obscuring their use as regulatory workarounds. This paper closes with a discussion of policy implications that centers on the consideration of business incentives that drive AI development and the role of technical expertise in assessing whether these technologies fulfill their purported protections.

Growing concerns surrounding AI safety and data privacy have driven the development of Machine Unlearning as a potential solution. However, current machine unlearning algorithms are designed to complement the offline training paradigm. The emergence of the Continual Learning (CL) paradigm promises incremental model updates, enabling models to learn new tasks sequentially. Naturally, some of those tasks may need to be unlearned to address safety or privacy concerns that might arise. We find that applying conventional unlearning algorithms in continual learning environments creates two critical problems: performance degradation on retained tasks and task relapse, where previously unlearned tasks resurface during subsequent learning. Furthermore, most unlearning algorithms require data to operate, which conflicts with CL's philosophy of discarding past data. A clear need arises for unlearning algorithms that are data-free and mindful of future learning. To that end, we propose UnCLe, an Unlearning framework for Continual Learning. UnCLe employs a hypernetwork that learns to generate task-specific network parameters, using task embeddings. Tasks are unlearned by aligning the corresponding generated network parameters with noise, without requiring any data. Empirical evaluations on several vision data sets demonstrate UnCLe's ability to sequentially perform multiple learning and unlearning operations with minimal disruption to previously acquired knowledge.

Mental health applications have emerged as a critical area in computational health, driven by rising global rates of mental illness, the integration of AI in psychological care, and the need for scalable solutions in underserved communities. These include therapy chatbots, crisis detection, and wellness platforms handling sensitive data, requiring specialized AI safety beyond general safeguards due to emotional vulnerability, risks like misdiagnosis or symptom exacerbation, and precise management of vulnerable states to avoid severe outcomes such as self-harm or loss of trust. Despite AI safety advances, general safeguards inadequately address mental health-specific challenges, including crisis intervention accuracy to avert escalations, therapeutic guideline adherence to prevent misinformation, scale limitations in resource-constrained settings, and adaptation to nuanced dialogues where generics may introduce biases or miss distress signals. We introduce an approach to apply Constitutional AI training with domain-specific mental health principles for safe, domain-adapted CAI systems in computational mental health applications.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) have shown remarkable progress on complex reasoning tasks. However, some questions posed to LRMs are inherently unanswerable, such as math problems lacking sufficient conditions. We find that LRMs continually fail to provide appropriate abstentions when confronted with these unanswerable questions. In this paper, we systematically analyze, investigate, and resolve this issue for trustworthy AI. We first conduct a detailed analysis of the distinct response behaviors of LRMs when facing unanswerable questions. Then, we show that LRMs possess sufficient cognitive capabilities to recognize the flaws in these questions. However, they fail to exhibit appropriate abstention behavior, revealing a misalignment between their internal cognition and external response. Finally, to resolve this issue, we propose a lightweight, two-stage method that combines cognitive monitoring with inference-time intervention. Experimental results demonstrate that our method significantly improves the abstention rate while maintaining the overall reasoning performance.

The transition of next generation advanced nuclear reactor systems from analog to fully digital instrumentation and control will necessitate robust mechanisms to safeguard against potential data integrity threats. One challenge is the real-time characterization of false data injections, which can mask sensor signals and potentially disrupt reactor control systems. While significant progress has been made in anomaly detection within reactor systems, potential false data injections have been shown to bypass conventional linear time-invariant state estimators and failure detectors based on statistical thresholds. The dynamic, nonlinear, multi-variate nature of sensor signals, combined with inherent noise and limited availability of real-world training data, makes the characterization of such threats and more importantly their differentiation from anticipated process anomalies particularly challenging. In this paper, we present an eXplainable AI (XAI) framework for identifying non-stationary concurrent replay attacks in nuclear reactor signals with minimal training data. The proposed framework leverages progress on recurrent neural networks and residual analysis coupled with a modified SHAP algorithm and rule-based correlations. The recurrent neural networks are trained only on normal operational data while for residual analysis we introduce an adaptive windowing technique to improve detection accuracy. We successfully benchmarked this framework on a real-world dataset from Purdue's nuclear reactor (PUR-1). We were able to detect false data injections with accuracy higher than 0.93 and less than 0.01 false positives, differentiate from expected process anomalies, and to identify the origin of the falsified signals.

Early detection of lung cancer is critical to improving survival outcomes. We present a deep learning framework for automated lung cancer screening from chest computed tomography (CT) images with integrated explainability. Using the IQ-OTH/NCCD dataset (1,197 scans across Normal, Benign, and Malignant classes), we evaluate a custom convolutional neural network (CNN) and three fine-tuned transfer learning backbones: DenseNet121, ResNet152, and VGG19. Models are trained with cost-sensitive learning to mitigate class imbalance and evaluated via accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and ROC-AUC. While ResNet152 achieved the highest accuracy (97.3%), DenseNet121 provided the best overall balance in precision, recall, and F1 (up to 92%, 90%, 91%, respectively). We further apply Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) to visualize evidence contributing to predictions, improving clinical transparency. Results indicate that CNN-based approaches augmented with explainability can provide fast, accurate, and interpretable support for lung cancer screening, particularly in resource-limited settings.

AI-powered scarce resource allocation policies rely on predictions to target either specific individuals (e.g., high-risk) or settings (e.g., neighborhoods). Recent research on individual-level targeting demonstrates conflicting results; some models show that targeting is not useful when inequality is high, while other work demonstrates potential benefits. To study and reconcile this apparent discrepancy, we develop a stylized framework based on the Mallows model to understand how the spatial distribution of inequality affects the effectiveness of door-to-door outreach policies. We introduce the RENT (Relative Efficiency of Non-Targeting) metric, which we use to assess the effectiveness of targeting approaches compared with neighborhood-based approaches in preventing tenant eviction when high-risk households are more versus less spatially concentrated. We then calibrate the model parameters to eviction court records collected in a medium-sized city in the USA. Results demonstrate considerable gains in the number of high-risk households canvassed through individually targeted policies, even in a highly segregated metro area with concentrated risks of eviction. We conclude that apparent discrepancies in the prior literature can be reconciled by considering 1) the source of deployment costs and 2) the observed versus modeled concentrations of risk. Our results inform the deployment of AI-based solutions in social service provision that account for particular applications and geographies.

Operationalizing the EU AI Act requires clear technical documentation to ensure AI systems are transparent, traceable, and accountable. Existing documentation templates for AI systems do not fully cover the entire AI lifecycle while meeting the technical documentation requirements of the AI Act. This paper addresses those shortcomings by introducing open-source templates and examples for documenting data, models, and applications to provide sufficient documentation for certifying compliance with the AI Act. These templates track the system status over the entire AI lifecycle, ensuring traceability, reproducibility, and compliance with the AI Act. They also promote discoverability and collaboration, reduce risks, and align with best practices in AI documentation and governance. The templates are evaluated and refined based on user feedback to enable insights into their usability and implementability. We then validate the approach on real-world scenarios, providing examples that further guide their implementation: the data template is followed to document a skin tones dataset created to support fairness evaluations of downstream computer vision models and human-centric applications; the model template is followed to document a neural network for segmenting human silhouettes in photos. The application template is tested on a system deployed for construction site safety using real-time video analytics and sensor data. Our results show that TechOps can serve as a practical tool to enable oversight for regulatory compliance and responsible AI development.

A surge of recent work explores the ethical and societal implications of large-scale AI models that make "moral" judgments. Much of this literature focuses either on alignment with human judgments through various thought experiments or on the group fairness implications of AI judgments. However, the most immediate and likely use of AI is to help or fully replace the so-called street-level bureaucrats, the individuals deciding to allocate scarce social resources or approve benefits. There is a rich history underlying how principles of local justice determine how society decides on prioritization mechanisms in such domains. In this paper, we examine how well LLM judgments align with human judgments, as well as with socially and politically determined vulnerability scoring systems currently used in the domain of homelessness resource allocation. Crucially, we use real data on those needing services (maintaining strict confidentiality by only using local large models) to perform our analyses. We find that LLM prioritizations are extremely inconsistent in several ways: internally on different runs, between different LLMs, and between LLMs and the vulnerability scoring systems. At the same time, LLMs demonstrate qualitative consistency with lay human judgments in pairwise testing. Findings call into question the readiness of current generation AI systems for naive integration in high-stakes societal decision-making.

Explainable AI (XAI) in creative contexts can go beyond transparency to support artistic engagement, modifiability, and sustained practice. While curated datasets and training human-scale models can offer artists greater agency and control, large-scale generative models like text-to-image diffusion systems often obscure these possibilities. We suggest that even large models can be treated as creative materials if their internal structure is exposed and manipulable. We propose a craft-based approach to explainability rooted in long-term, hands-on engagement akin to Schön's "reflection-in-action" and demonstrate its application through a model-bending and inspection plugin integrated into the node-based interface of ComfyUI. We demonstrate that by interactively manipulating different parts of a generative model, artists can develop an intuition about how each component influences the output.