Research Papers

Recent advances in machine learning have led to growing interest in Explainable AI (xAI) to enable humans to gain insight into the decision-making of machine learning models. Despite this recent interest, the utility of xAI techniques has not yet been characterized in human-machine teaming. Importantly, xAI offers the promise of enhancing team situational awareness (SA) and shared mental model development, which are the key characteristics of effective human-machine teams. Rapidly developing such mental models is especially critical in ad hoc human-machine teaming, where agents do not have a priori knowledge of others' decision-making strategies. In this paper, we present two novel human-subject experiments quantifying the benefits of deploying xAI techniques within a human-machine teaming scenario. First, we show that xAI techniques can support SA ($p<0.05)$. Second, we examine how different SA levels induced via a collaborative AI policy abstraction affect ad hoc human-machine teaming performance. Importantly, we find that the benefits of xAI are not universal, as there is a strong dependence on the composition of the human-machine team. Novices benefit from xAI providing increased SA ($p<0.05$) but are susceptible to cognitive overhead ($p<0.05$). On the other hand, expert performance degrades with the addition of xAI-based support ($p<0.05$), indicating that the cost of paying attention to the xAI outweighs the benefits obtained from being provided additional information to enhance SA. Our results demonstrate that researchers must deliberately design and deploy the right xAI techniques in the right scenario by carefully considering human-machine team composition and how the xAI method augments SA.

Although deep face recognition has achieved impressive progress in recent years, controversy has arisen regarding discrimination based on skin tone, questioning their deployment into real-world scenarios. In this paper, we aim to systematically and scientifically study this bias from both data and algorithm aspects. First, using the dermatologist approved Fitzpatrick Skin Type classification system and Individual Typology Angle, we contribute a benchmark called Identity Shades (IDS) database, which effectively quantifies the degree of the bias with respect to skin tone in existing face recognition algorithms and commercial APIs. Further, we provide two skin-tone aware training datasets, called BUPT-Globalface dataset and BUPT-Balancedface dataset, to remove bias in training data. Finally, to mitigate the algorithmic bias, we propose a novel meta-learning algorithm, called Meta Balanced Network (MBN), which learns adaptive margins in large margin loss such that the model optimized by this loss can perform fairly across people with different skin tones. To determine the margins, our method optimizes a meta skewness loss on a clean and unbiased meta set and utilizes backward-on-backward automatic differentiation to perform a second order gradient descent step on the current margins. Extensive experiments show that MBN successfully mitigates bias and learns more balanced performance for people with different skin tones in face recognition. The proposed datasets are available at http://www.whdeng.cn/RFW/index.html.

The need for interpretable and accountable intelligent systems grows along with the prevalence of artificial intelligence applications used in everyday life. Explainable intelligent systems are designed to self-explain the reasoning behind system decisions and predictions, and researchers from different disciplines work together to define, design, and evaluate interpretable systems. However, scholars from different disciplines focus on different objectives and fairly independent topics of interpretable machine learning research, which poses challenges for identifying appropriate design and evaluation methodology and consolidating knowledge across efforts. To this end, this paper presents a survey and framework intended to share knowledge and experiences of XAI design and evaluation methods across multiple disciplines. Aiming to support diverse design goals and evaluation methods in XAI research, after a thorough review of XAI related papers in the fields of machine learning, visualization, and human-computer interaction, we present a categorization of interpretable machine learning design goals and evaluation methods to show a mapping between design goals for different XAI user groups and their evaluation methods. From our findings, we develop a framework with step-by-step design guidelines paired with evaluation methods to close the iterative design and evaluation cycles in multidisciplinary XAI teams. Further, we provide summarized ready-to-use tables of evaluation methods and recommendations for different goals in XAI research.

A significant body of recent research in the field of Learning Analytics has focused on leveraging machine learning approaches for predicting at-risk students in order to initiate timely interventions and thereby elevate retention and completion rates. The overarching feature of the majority of these research studies has been on the science of prediction only. The component of predictive analytics concerned with interpreting the internals of the models and explaining their predictions for individual cases to stakeholders has largely been neglected. Additionally, works that attempt to employ data-driven prescriptive analytics to automatically generate evidence-based remedial advice for at-risk learners are in their infancy. eXplainable AI is a field that has recently emerged providing cutting-edge tools which support transparent predictive analytics and techniques for generating tailored advice for at-risk students. This study proposes a novel framework that unifies both transparent machine learning as well as techniques for enabling prescriptive analytics, while integrating the latest advances in large language models. This work practically demonstrates the proposed framework using predictive models for identifying at-risk learners of programme non-completion. The study then further demonstrates how predictive modelling can be augmented with prescriptive analytics on two case studies in order to generate human-readable prescriptive feedback for those who are at risk using ChatGPT.

With the rapid evolution of the Internet and the exponential proliferation of information, users encounter information overload and the conundrum of choice. Personalized recommendation systems play a pivotal role in alleviating this burden by aiding users in filtering and selecting information tailored to their preferences and requirements. Such systems not only enhance user experience and satisfaction but also furnish opportunities for businesses and platforms to augment user engagement, sales, and advertising efficacy.This paper undertakes a comparative analysis between the operational mechanisms of traditional e-commerce commodity classification systems and personalized recommendation systems. It delineates the significance and application of personalized recommendation systems across e-commerce, content information, and media domains. Furthermore, it delves into the challenges confronting personalized recommendation systems in e-commerce, including data privacy, algorithmic bias, scalability, and the cold start problem. Strategies to address these challenges are elucidated.Subsequently, the paper outlines a personalized recommendation system leveraging the BERT model and nearest neighbor algorithm, specifically tailored to address the exigencies of the eBay e-commerce platform. The efficacy of this recommendation system is substantiated through manual evaluation, and a practical application operational guide and structured output recommendation results are furnished to ensure the system's operability and scalability.

Audits are critical mechanisms for identifying the risks and limitations of deployed artificial intelligence (AI) systems. However, the effective execution of AI audits remains incredibly difficult, and practitioners often need to make use of various tools to support their efforts. Drawing on interviews with 35 AI audit practitioners and a landscape analysis of 435 tools, we compare the current ecosystem of AI audit tooling to practitioner needs. While many tools are designed to help set standards and evaluate AI systems, they often fall short in supporting accountability. We outline challenges practitioners faced in their efforts to use AI audit tools and highlight areas for future tool development beyond evaluation -- from harms discovery to advocacy. We conclude that the available resources do not currently support the full scope of AI audit practitioners' needs and recommend that the field move beyond tools for just evaluation and towards more comprehensive infrastructure for AI accountability.

Farsight: Fostering Responsible AI Awareness During AI Application Prototyping

Zijie J. Wang, Chinmay Kulkarni, Lauren Wilcox +2

Prompt-based interfaces for Large Language Models (LLMs) have made prototyping and building AI-powered applications easier than ever before. However, identifying potential harms that may arise from AI applications remains a challenge, particularly during prompt-based prototyping. To address this, we present Farsight, a novel in situ interactive tool that helps people identify potential harms from the AI applications they are prototyping. Based on a user's prompt, Farsight highlights news articles about relevant AI incidents and allows users to explore and edit LLM-generated use cases, stakeholders, and harms. We report design insights from a co-design study with 10 AI prototypers and findings from a user study with 42 AI prototypers. After using Farsight, AI prototypers in our user study are better able to independently identify potential harms associated with a prompt and find our tool more useful and usable than existing resources. Their qualitative feedback also highlights that Farsight encourages them to focus on end-users and think beyond immediate harms. We discuss these findings and reflect on their implications for designing AI prototyping experiences that meaningfully engage with AI harms. Farsight is publicly accessible at: https://PAIR-code.github.io/farsight.

Towards the Augmented Pathologist: Challenges of Explainable-AI in Digital Pathology

Andreas Holzinger, Bernd Malle, Peter Kieseberg +4

Digital pathology is not only one of the most promising fields of diagnostic medicine, but at the same time a hot topic for fundamental research. Digital pathology is not just the transfer of histopathological slides into digital representations. The combination of different data sources (images, patient records, and *omics data) together with current advances in artificial intelligence/machine learning enable to make novel information accessible and quantifiable to a human expert, which is not yet available and not exploited in current medical settings. The grand goal is to reach a level of usable intelligence to understand the data in the context of an application task, thereby making machine decisions transparent, interpretable and explainable. The foundation of such an "augmented pathologist" needs an integrated approach: While machine learning algorithms require many thousands of training examples, a human expert is often confronted with only a few data points. Interestingly, humans can learn from such few examples and are able to instantly interpret complex patterns. Consequently, the grand goal is to combine the possibilities of artificial intelligence with human intelligence and to find a well-suited balance between them to enable what neither of them could do on their own. This can raise the quality of education, diagnosis, prognosis and prediction of cancer and other diseases. In this paper we describe some (incomplete) research issues which we believe should be addressed in an integrated and concerted effort for paving the way towards the augmented pathologist.

Explainable AI (XAI) refers to techniques that provide human-understandable insights into the workings of AI models. Recently, the focus of XAI is being extended toward explaining Large Language Models (LLMs). This extension calls for a significant transformation in the XAI methodologies for two reasons. First, many existing XAI methods cannot be directly applied to LLMs due to their complexity and advanced capabilities. Second, as LLMs are increasingly deployed in diverse applications, the role of XAI shifts from merely opening the ``black box'' to actively enhancing the productivity and applicability of LLMs in real-world settings. Meanwhile, the conversation and generation abilities of LLMs can reciprocally enhance XAI. Therefore, in this paper, we introduce Usable XAI in the context of LLMs by analyzing (1) how XAI can explain and improve LLM-based AI systems and (2) how XAI techniques can be improved by using LLMs. We introduce 10 strategies, introducing the key techniques for each and discussing their associated challenges. We also provide case studies to demonstrate how to obtain and leverage explanations. The code used in this paper can be found at: https://github.com/JacksonWuxs/UsableXAI_LLM.

Beyond Fair Pay: Ethical Implications of NLP Crowdsourcing

Boaz Shmueli, Jan Fell, Soumya Ray +1

The use of crowdworkers in NLP research is growing rapidly, in tandem with the exponential increase in research production in machine learning and AI. Ethical discussion regarding the use of crowdworkers within the NLP research community is typically confined in scope to issues related to labor conditions such as fair pay. We draw attention to the lack of ethical considerations related to the various tasks performed by workers, including labeling, evaluation, and production. We find that the Final Rule, the common ethical framework used by researchers, did not anticipate the use of online crowdsourcing platforms for data collection, resulting in gaps between the spirit and practice of human-subjects ethics in NLP research. We enumerate common scenarios where crowdworkers performing NLP tasks are at risk of harm. We thus recommend that researchers evaluate these risks by considering the three ethical principles set up by the Belmont Report. We also clarify some common misconceptions regarding the Institutional Review Board (IRB) application. We hope this paper will serve to reopen the discussion within our community regarding the ethical use of crowdworkers.

We describe an explainable AI saliency map method for use with deep convolutional neural networks (CNN) that is much more efficient than popular fine-resolution gradient methods. It is also quantitatively similar or better in accuracy. Our technique works by measuring information at the end of each network scale which is then combined into a single saliency map. We describe how saliency measures can be made more efficient by exploiting Saliency Map Order Equivalence. We visualize individual scale/layer contributions by using a Layer Ordered Visualization of Information. This provides an interesting comparison of scale information contributions within the network not provided by other saliency map methods. Using our method instead of Guided Backprop, coarse-resolution class activation methods such as Grad-CAM and Grad-CAM++ seem to yield demonstrably superior results without sacrificing speed. This will make fine-resolution saliency methods feasible on resource limited platforms such as robots, cell phones, low-cost industrial devices, astronomy and satellite imagery.

LLMs Encode Harmfulness and Refusal Separately

Jiachen Zhao, Jing Huang, Zhengxuan Wu +2

LLMs are trained to refuse harmful instructions, but do they truly understand harmfulness beyond just refusing? Prior work has shown that LLMs' refusal behaviors can be mediated by a one-dimensional subspace, i.e., a refusal direction. In this work, we identify a new dimension to analyze safety mechanisms in LLMs, i.e., harmfulness, which is encoded internally as a separate concept from refusal. There exists a harmfulness direction that is distinct from the refusal direction. As causal evidence, steering along the harmfulness direction can lead LLMs to interpret harmless instructions as harmful, but steering along the refusal direction tends to elicit refusal responses directly without reversing the model's judgment on harmfulness. Furthermore, using our identified harmfulness concept, we find that certain jailbreak methods work by reducing the refusal signals without reversing the model's internal belief of harmfulness. We also find that adversarially finetuning models to accept harmful instructions has minimal impact on the model's internal belief of harmfulness. These insights lead to a practical safety application: The model's latent harmfulness representation can serve as an intrinsic safeguard (Latent Guard) for detecting unsafe inputs and reducing over-refusals that is robust to finetuning attacks. For instance, our Latent Guard achieves performance comparable to or better than Llama Guard 3 8B, a dedicated finetuned safeguard model, across different jailbreak methods. Our findings suggest that LLMs' internal understanding of harmfulness is more robust than their refusal decision to diverse input instructions, offering a new perspective to study AI safety.