Research Papers

Forecasting AI Progress: A Research Agenda

Ross Gruetzemacher, Florian Dorner, Niko Bernaola-Alvarez +2

Forecasting AI progress is essential to reducing uncertainty in order to appropriately plan for research efforts on AI safety and AI governance. While this is generally considered to be an important topic, little work has been conducted on it and there is no published document that gives and objective overview of the field. Moreover, the field is very diverse and there is no published consensus regarding its direction. This paper describes the development of a research agenda for forecasting AI progress which utilized the Delphi technique to elicit and aggregate experts' opinions on what questions and methods to prioritize. The results of the Delphi are presented; the remainder of the paper follow the structure of these results, briefly reviewing relevant literature and suggesting future work for each topic. Experts indicated that a wide variety of methods should be considered for forecasting AI progress. Moreover, experts identified salient questions that were both general and completely unique to the problem of forecasting AI progress. Some of the highest priority topics include the validation of (partially unresolved) forecasts, how to make forecasting action-guiding and the quality of different performance metrics. While statistical methods seem more promising, there is also recognition that supplementing judgmental techniques can be quite beneficial.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (or xAI) has become an important research topic in the fields of Machine Learning and Deep Learning. In this paper, we propose a Genetic Programming (GP) based approach, named Genetic Programming Explainer (GPX), to the problem of explaining decisions computed by AI systems. The method generates a noise set located in the neighborhood of the point of interest, whose prediction should be explained, and fits a local explanation model for the analyzed sample. The tree structure generated by GPX provides a comprehensible analytical, possibly non-linear, symbolic expression which reflects the local behavior of the complex model. We considered three machine learning techniques that can be recognized as complex black-box models: Random Forest, Deep Neural Network and Support Vector Machine in twenty data sets for regression and classifications problems. Our results indicate that the GPX is able to produce more accurate understanding of complex models than the state of the art. The results validate the proposed approach as a novel way to deploy GP to improve interpretability.

Millions of people worldwide are absent from their country's census. Accurate, current, and granular population metrics are critical to improving government allocation of resources, to measuring disease control, to responding to natural disasters, and to studying any aspect of human life in these communities. Satellite imagery can provide sufficient information to build a population map without the cost and time of a government census. We present two Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) architectures which efficiently and effectively combine satellite imagery inputs from multiple sources to accurately predict the population density of a region. In this paper, we use satellite imagery from rural villages in India and population labels from the 2011 SECC census. Our best model achieves better performance than previous papers as well as LandScan, a community standard for global population distribution.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has become popular in the last few years. The Artificial Intelligence (AI) community in general, and the Machine Learning (ML) community in particular, is coming to the realisation that in many applications, for AI to be trusted, it must not only demonstrate good performance in its decisionmaking, but it also must explain these decisions and convince us that it is making the decisions for the right reasons. However, different applications have different requirements on the information required of the underlying AI system in order to convince us that it is worthy of our trust. How do we define these requirements? In this paper, we present three dimensions for categorising the explanatory requirements of different applications. These are Source, Depth and Scope. We focus on the problem of matching up the explanatory requirements of different applications with the capabilities of underlying ML techniques to provide them. We deliberately avoid including aspects of explanation that are already well-covered by the existing literature and we focus our discussion on ML although the principles apply to AI more broadly.

There is general agreement that some form of regulation is necessary both for AI creators to be incentivised to develop trustworthy systems, and for users to actually trust those systems. But there is much debate about what form these regulations should take and how they should be implemented. Most work in this area has been qualitative, and has not been able to make formal predictions. Here, we propose that evolutionary game theory can be used to quantitatively model the dilemmas faced by users, AI creators, and regulators, and provide insights into the possible effects of different regulatory regimes. We show that creating trustworthy AI and user trust requires regulators to be incentivised to regulate effectively. We demonstrate the effectiveness of two mechanisms that can achieve this. The first is where governments can recognise and reward regulators that do a good job. In that case, if the AI system is not too risky for users then some level of trustworthy development and user trust evolves. We then consider an alternative solution, where users can condition their trust decision on the effectiveness of the regulators. This leads to effective regulation, and consequently the development of trustworthy AI and user trust, provided that the cost of implementing regulations is not too high. Our findings highlight the importance of considering the effect of different regulatory regimes from an evolutionary game theoretic perspective.

Exploring XAI for the Arts: Explaining Latent Space in Generative Music

Nick Bryan-Kinns, Berker Banar, Corey Ford +4

Explainable AI has the potential to support more interactive and fluid co-creative AI systems which can creatively collaborate with people. To do this, creative AI models need to be amenable to debugging by offering eXplainable AI (XAI) features which are inspectable, understandable, and modifiable. However, currently there is very little XAI for the arts. In this work, we demonstrate how a latent variable model for music generation can be made more explainable; specifically we extend MeasureVAE which generates measures of music. We increase the explainability of the model by: i) using latent space regularisation to force some specific dimensions of the latent space to map to meaningful musical attributes, ii) providing a user interface feedback loop to allow people to adjust dimensions of the latent space and observe the results of these changes in real-time, iii) providing a visualisation of the musical attributes in the latent space to help people understand and predict the effect of changes to latent space dimensions. We suggest that in doing so we bridge the gap between the latent space and the generated musical outcomes in a meaningful way which makes the model and its outputs more explainable and more debuggable.

eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in aging clock models

Alena Kalyakulina, Igor Yusipov, Alexey Moskalev +2

eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is a rapidly progressing field of machine learning, aiming to unravel the predictions of complex models. XAI is especially required in sensitive applications, e.g. in health care, when diagnosis, recommendations and treatment choices might rely on the decisions made by artificial intelligence systems. AI approaches have become widely used in aging research as well, in particular, in developing biological clock models and identifying biomarkers of aging and age-related diseases. However, the potential of XAI here awaits to be fully appreciated. We discuss the application of XAI for developing the "aging clocks" and present a comprehensive analysis of the literature categorized by the focus on particular physiological systems.

Bridging the Transparency Gap: What Can Explainable AI Learn From the AI Act?

Balint Gyevnar, Nick Ferguson, Burkhard Schafer

The European Union has proposed the Artificial Intelligence Act which introduces detailed requirements of transparency for AI systems. Many of these requirements can be addressed by the field of explainable AI (XAI), however, there is a fundamental difference between XAI and the Act regarding what transparency is. The Act views transparency as a means that supports wider values, such as accountability, human rights, and sustainable innovation. In contrast, XAI views transparency narrowly as an end in itself, focusing on explaining complex algorithmic properties without considering the socio-technical context. We call this difference the ``transparency gap''. Failing to address the transparency gap, XAI risks leaving a range of transparency issues unaddressed. To begin to bridge this gap, we overview and clarify the terminology of how XAI and European regulation -- the Act and the related General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) -- view basic definitions of transparency. By comparing the disparate views of XAI and regulation, we arrive at four axes where practical work could bridge the transparency gap: defining the scope of transparency, clarifying the legal status of XAI, addressing issues with conformity assessment, and building explainability for datasets.

Within the current AI ethics discourse, there is a gap in empirical research on understanding how AI practitioners understand ethics and socially organize to operationalize ethical concerns, particularly in the context of AI start-ups. This gap intensifies the risk of a disconnect between scholarly research, innovation, and application. This risk materializes acutely as mounting pressures to identify and mitigate the potential harms of AI systems have created an urgent need to assess and implement socio-technical innovation for fairness, accountability, and transparency. Building on social practice theory, we address this need via a framework that allows AI researchers, practitioners, and regulators to systematically analyze existing cultural understandings, histories, and social practices of ethical AI to define appropriate strategies for effectively implementing socio-technical innovations. Our contributions are threefold: 1) we introduce a practice-based approach for understanding ethical AI; 2) we present empirical findings from our study on the operationalization of ethics in German AI start-ups to underline that AI ethics and social practices must be understood in their specific cultural and historical contexts; and 3) based on our empirical findings, we suggest that ethical AI practices can be broken down into principles, needs, narratives, materializations, and cultural genealogies to form a useful backdrop for considering socio-technical innovations.

Landslides have been a regular occurrence and an alarming threat to human life and property in the era of anthropogenic global warming. An early prediction of landslide susceptibility using a data-driven approach is a demand of time. In this study, we explored the eloquent features that best describe landslide susceptibility with state-of-the-art machine learning methods. In our study, we employed state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms including XgBoost, LR, KNN, SVM, and Adaboost for landslide susceptibility prediction. To find the best hyperparameters of each individual classifier for optimized performance, we have incorporated the Grid Search method, with 10 Fold Cross-Validation. In this context, the optimized version of XgBoost outperformed all other classifiers with a Cross-validation Weighted F1 score of 94.62 %. Followed by this empirical evidence, we explored the XgBoost classifier by incorporating TreeSHAP, a game-theory-based statistical algorithm used to explain Machine Learning models, to identify eloquent features such as SLOPE, ELEVATION, TWI that complement the performance of the XGBoost classifier mostly and features such as LANDUSE, NDVI, SPI which has less effect on models performance. According to the TreeSHAP explanation of features, we selected the 9 most significant landslide causal factors out of 15. Evidently, an optimized version of XgBoost along with feature reduction by 40 % has outperformed all other classifiers in terms of popular evaluation metrics with a Cross-Validation Weighted F1 score of 95.01 % on the training and AUC score of 97 %

Scrutinizing XAI using linear ground-truth data with suppressor variables

Rick Wilming, Céline Budding, Klaus-Robert Müller +1

Machine learning (ML) is increasingly often used to inform high-stakes decisions. As complex ML models (e.g., deep neural networks) are often considered black boxes, a wealth of procedures has been developed to shed light on their inner workings and the ways in which their predictions come about, defining the field of 'explainable AI' (XAI). Saliency methods rank input features according to some measure of 'importance'. Such methods are difficult to validate since a formal definition of feature importance is, thus far, lacking. It has been demonstrated that some saliency methods can highlight features that have no statistical association with the prediction target (suppressor variables). To avoid misinterpretations due to such behavior, we propose the actual presence of such an association as a necessary condition and objective preliminary definition for feature importance. We carefully crafted a ground-truth dataset in which all statistical dependencies are well-defined and linear, serving as a benchmark to study the problem of suppressor variables. We evaluate common explanation methods including LRP, DTD, PatternNet, PatternAttribution, LIME, Anchors, SHAP, and permutation-based methods with respect to our objective definition. We show that most of these methods are unable to distinguish important features from suppressors in this setting.

Ethics statements have been proposed as a mechanism to increase transparency and promote reflection on the societal impacts of published research. In 2020, the machine learning (ML) conference NeurIPS broke new ground by requiring that all papers include a broader impact statement. This requirement was removed in 2021, in favour of a checklist approach. The 2020 statements therefore provide a unique opportunity to learn from the broader impact experiment: to investigate the benefits and challenges of this and similar governance mechanisms, as well as providing an insight into how ML researchers think about the societal impacts of their own work. Such learning is needed as NeurIPS and other venues continue to question and adapt their policies. To enable this, we have created a dataset containing the impact statements from all NeurIPS 2020 papers, along with additional information such as affiliation type, location and subject area, and a simple visualisation tool for exploration. We also provide an initial quantitative analysis of the dataset, covering representation, engagement, common themes, and willingness to discuss potential harms alongside benefits. We investigate how these vary by geography, affiliation type and subject area. Drawing on these findings, we discuss the potential benefits and negative outcomes of ethics statement requirements, and their possible causes and associated challenges. These lead us to several lessons to be learnt from the 2020 requirement: (i) the importance of creating the right incentives, (ii) the need for clear expectations and guidance, and (iii) the importance of transparency and constructive deliberation. We encourage other researchers to use our dataset to provide additional analysis, to further our understanding of how researchers responded to this requirement, and to investigate the benefits and challenges of this and related mechanisms.