Research Papers

There are synergies of research interests and industrial efforts in modeling fairness and correcting algorithmic bias in machine learning. In this paper, we present a scalable algorithm for spectral clustering (SC) with group fairness constraints. Group fairness is also known as statistical parity where in each cluster, each protected group is represented with the same proportion as in the entirety. While FairSC algorithm (Kleindessner et al., 2019) is able to find the fairer clustering, it is compromised by high costs due to the kernels of computing nullspaces and the square roots of dense matrices explicitly. We present a new formulation of underlying spectral computation by incorporating nullspace projection and Hotelling's deflation such that the resulting algorithm, called s-FairSC, only involves the sparse matrix-vector products and is able to fully exploit the sparsity of the fair SC model. The experimental results on the modified stochastic block model demonstrate that s-FairSC is comparable with FairSC in recovering fair clustering. Meanwhile, it is sped up by a factor of 12 for moderate model sizes. s-FairSC is further demonstrated to be scalable in the sense that the computational costs of s-FairSC only increase marginally compared to the SC without fairness constraints.

Mimetic Models: Ethical Implications of AI that Acts Like You

Reid McIlroy-Young, Jon Kleinberg, Siddhartha Sen +2

An emerging theme in artificial intelligence research is the creation of models to simulate the decisions and behavior of specific people, in domains including game-playing, text generation, and artistic expression. These models go beyond earlier approaches in the way they are tailored to individuals, and the way they are designed for interaction rather than simply the reproduction of fixed, pre-computed behaviors. We refer to these as mimetic models, and in this paper we develop a framework for characterizing the ethical and social issues raised by their growing availability. Our framework includes a number of distinct scenarios for the use of such models, and considers the impacts on a range of different participants, including the target being modeled, the operator who deploys the model, and the entities that interact with it.

A Principles-based Ethics Assurance Argument Pattern for AI and Autonomous Systems

Zoe Porter, Ibrahim Habli, John McDermid +1

An assurance case is a structured argument, typically produced by safety engineers, to communicate confidence that a critical or complex system, such as an aircraft, will be acceptably safe within its intended context. Assurance cases often inform third party approval of a system. One emerging proposition within the trustworthy AI and autonomous systems (AI/AS) research community is to use assurance cases to instil justified confidence that specific AI/AS will be ethically acceptable when operational in well-defined contexts. This paper substantially develops the proposition and makes it concrete. It brings together the assurance case methodology with a set of ethical principles to structure a principles-based ethics assurance argument pattern. The principles are justice, beneficence, non-maleficence, and respect for human autonomy, with the principle of transparency playing a supporting role. The argument pattern, shortened to the acronym PRAISE, is described. The objective of the proposed PRAISE argument pattern is to provide a reusable template for individual ethics assurance cases, by which engineers, developers, operators, or regulators could justify, communicate, or challenge a claim about the overall ethical acceptability of the use of a specific AI/AS in a given socio-technical context. We apply the pattern to the hypothetical use case of an autonomous robo-taxi service in a city centre.

A Few Good Counterfactuals: Generating Interpretable, Plausible and Diverse Counterfactual Explanations

Barry Smyth, Mark T Keane

Counterfactual explanations provide a potentially significant solution to the Explainable AI (XAI) problem, but good, native counterfactuals have been shown to rarely occur in most datasets. Hence, the most popular methods generate synthetic counterfactuals using blind perturbation. However, such methods have several shortcomings: the resulting counterfactuals (i) may not be valid data-points (they often use features that do not naturally occur), (ii) may lack the sparsity of good counterfactuals (if they modify too many features), and (iii) may lack diversity (if the generated counterfactuals are minimal variants of one another). We describe a method designed to overcome these problems, one that adapts native counterfactuals in the original dataset, to generate sparse, diverse synthetic counterfactuals from naturally occurring features. A series of experiments are reported that systematically explore parametric variations of this novel method on common datasets to establish the conditions for optimal performance.

A Unified Framework for Human AI Collaboration in Security Operations Centers with Trusted Autonomy

Ahmad Mohsin, Helge Janicke, Ahmed Ibrahim +2

This article presents a structured framework for Human-AI collaboration in Security Operations Centers (SOCs), integrating AI autonomy, trust calibration, and Human-in-the-loop decision making. Existing frameworks in SOCs often focus narrowly on automation, lacking systematic structures to manage human oversight, trust calibration, and scalable autonomy with AI. Many assume static or binary autonomy settings, failing to account for the varied complexity, criticality, and risk across SOC tasks considering Humans and AI collaboration. To address these limitations, we propose a novel autonomy tiered framework grounded in five levels of AI autonomy from manual to fully autonomous, mapped to Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) roles and task-specific trust thresholds. This enables adaptive and explainable AI integration across core SOC functions, including monitoring, protection, threat detection, alert triage, and incident response. The proposed framework differentiates itself from previous research by creating formal connections between autonomy, trust, and HITL across various SOC levels, which allows for adaptive task distribution according to operational complexity and associated risks. The framework is exemplified through a simulated cyber range that features the cybersecurity AI-Avatar, a fine-tuned LLM-based SOC assistant. The AI-Avatar case study illustrates human-AI collaboration for SOC tasks, reducing alert fatigue, enhancing response coordination, and strategically calibrating trust. This research systematically presents both the theoretical and practical aspects and feasibility of designing next-generation cognitive SOCs that leverage AI not to replace but to enhance human decision-making.

In recent years, AI red teaming has emerged as a practice for probing the safety and security of generative AI systems. Due to the nascency of the field, there are many open questions about how red teaming operations should be conducted. Based on our experience red teaming over 100 generative AI products at Microsoft, we present our internal threat model ontology and eight main lessons we have learned: 1. Understand what the system can do and where it is applied 2. You don't have to compute gradients to break an AI system 3. AI red teaming is not safety benchmarking 4. Automation can help cover more of the risk landscape 5. The human element of AI red teaming is crucial 6. Responsible AI harms are pervasive but difficult to measure 7. LLMs amplify existing security risks and introduce new ones 8. The work of securing AI systems will never be complete By sharing these insights alongside case studies from our operations, we offer practical recommendations aimed at aligning red teaming efforts with real world risks. We also highlight aspects of AI red teaming that we believe are often misunderstood and discuss open questions for the field to consider.

Safety cases for frontier AI

Marie Davidsen Buhl, Gaurav Sett, Leonie Koessler +2

As frontier artificial intelligence (AI) systems become more capable, it becomes more important that developers can explain why their systems are sufficiently safe. One way to do so is via safety cases: reports that make a structured argument, supported by evidence, that a system is safe enough in a given operational context. Safety cases are already common in other safety-critical industries such as aviation and nuclear power. In this paper, we explain why they may also be a useful tool in frontier AI governance, both in industry self-regulation and government regulation. We then discuss the practicalities of safety cases, outlining how to produce a frontier AI safety case and discussing what still needs to happen before safety cases can substantially inform decisions.

Feature attribution explains Artificial Intelligence (AI) at the instance level by providing importance scores of input features' contributions to model prediction. Integrated Gradients (IG) is a prominent path attribution method for deep neural networks, involving the integration of gradients along a path from the explained input (explicand) to a counterfactual instance (baseline). Current IG variants primarily focus on the gradient of explicand's output. However, our research indicates that the gradient of the counterfactual output significantly affects feature attribution as well. To achieve this, we propose Iterative Gradient path Integrated Gradients (IG2), considering both gradients. IG2 incorporates the counterfactual gradient iteratively into the integration path, generating a novel path (GradPath) and a novel baseline (GradCF). These two novel IG components effectively address the issues of attribution noise and arbitrary baseline choice in earlier IG methods. IG2, as a path method, satisfies many desirable axioms, which are theoretically justified in the paper. Experimental results on XAI benchmark, ImageNet, MNIST, TREC questions answering, wafer-map failure patterns, and CelebA face attributes validate that IG2 delivers superior feature attributions compared to the state-of-the-art techniques. The code is released at: https://github.com/JoeZhuo-ZY/IG2.

Recent years have witnessed an interesting phenomenon in which users come together to interrogate potentially harmful algorithmic behaviors they encounter in their everyday lives. Researchers have started to develop theoretical and empirical understandings of these user driven audits, with a hope to harness the power of users in detecting harmful machine behaviors. However, little is known about user participation and their division of labor in these audits, which are essential to support these collective efforts in the future. Through collecting and analyzing 17,984 tweets from four recent cases of user driven audits, we shed light on patterns of user participation and engagement, especially with the top contributors in each case. We also identified the various roles user generated content played in these audits, including hypothesizing, data collection, amplification, contextualization, and escalation. We discuss implications for designing tools to support user driven audits and users who labor to raise awareness of algorithm bias.

Towards Understanding Fairness and its Composition in Ensemble Machine Learning

Usman Gohar, Sumon Biswas, Hridesh Rajan

Machine Learning (ML) software has been widely adopted in modern society, with reported fairness implications for minority groups based on race, sex, age, etc. Many recent works have proposed methods to measure and mitigate algorithmic bias in ML models. The existing approaches focus on single classifier-based ML models. However, real-world ML models are often composed of multiple independent or dependent learners in an ensemble (e.g., Random Forest), where the fairness composes in a non-trivial way. How does fairness compose in ensembles? What are the fairness impacts of the learners on the ultimate fairness of the ensemble? Can fair learners result in an unfair ensemble? Furthermore, studies have shown that hyperparameters influence the fairness of ML models. Ensemble hyperparameters are more complex since they affect how learners are combined in different categories of ensembles. Understanding the impact of ensemble hyperparameters on fairness will help programmers design fair ensembles. Today, we do not understand these fully for different ensemble algorithms. In this paper, we comprehensively study popular real-world ensembles: bagging, boosting, stacking and voting. We have developed a benchmark of 168 ensemble models collected from Kaggle on four popular fairness datasets. We use existing fairness metrics to understand the composition of fairness. Our results show that ensembles can be designed to be fairer without using mitigation techniques. We also identify the interplay between fairness composition and data characteristics to guide fair ensemble design. Finally, our benchmark can be leveraged for further research on fair ensembles. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first and largest studies on fairness composition in ensembles yet presented in the literature.

This paper examines two different yet related questions related to explainable AI (XAI) practices. Machine learning (ML) is increasingly important in financial services, such as pre-approval, credit underwriting, investments, and various front-end and back-end activities. Machine Learning can automatically detect non-linearities and interactions in training data, facilitating faster and more accurate credit decisions. However, machine learning models are opaque and hard to explain, which are critical elements needed for establishing a reliable technology. The study compares various machine learning models, including single classifiers (logistic regression, decision trees, LDA, QDA), heterogeneous ensembles (AdaBoost, Random Forest), and sequential neural networks. The results indicate that ensemble classifiers and neural networks outperform. In addition, two advanced post-hoc model agnostic explainability techniques - LIME and SHAP are utilized to assess ML-based credit scoring models using the open-access datasets offered by US-based P2P Lending Platform, Lending Club. For this study, we are also using machine learning algorithms to develop new investment models and explore portfolio strategies that can maximize profitability while minimizing risk.

The remarkable advancements in Deep Learning (DL) algorithms have fueled enthusiasm for using Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies in almost every domain; however, the opaqueness of these algorithms put a question mark on their applications in safety-critical systems. In this regard, the `explainability' dimension is not only essential to both explain the inner workings of black-box algorithms, but it also adds accountability and transparency dimensions that are of prime importance for regulators, consumers, and service providers. eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is the set of techniques and methods to convert the so-called black-box AI algorithms to white-box algorithms, where the results achieved by these algorithms and the variables, parameters, and steps taken by the algorithm to reach the obtained results, are transparent and explainable. To complement the existing literature on XAI, in this paper, we take an `engineering' approach to illustrate the concepts of XAI. We discuss the stakeholders in XAI and describe the mathematical contours of XAI from engineering perspective. Then we take the autonomous car as a use-case and discuss the applications of XAI for its different components such as object detection, perception, control, action decision, and so on. This work is an exploratory study to identify new avenues of research in the field of XAI.