Research Papers

A significant majority of AI fairness research studying the harmful outcomes of GAI tools have overlooked non-Western communities and contexts, necessitating a stronger coverage in this vein. We extend our previous work on exoticism (Ghosh et al., 2024) of 'Global South' countries from across the world, as depicted by GAI tools. We analyze generated images of individuals from 13 countries -- India, Bangladesh, Papua New Guinea, Egypt, Ethiopia, Tunisia, Sudan, Libya, Venezuela, Colombia, Indonesia, Honduras, and Mexico -- performing everyday activities (such as being at home, going to work, getting groceries, etc.), as opposed to images for the same activities being performed by persons from 3 'Global North' countries -- USA, UK, Australia. While outputs for 'Global North' demonstrate a difference across images and people clad in activity-appropriate attire, individuals from 'Global South' countries are depicted in similar attire irrespective of the performed activity, indicative of a pattern of exoticism where attire or other cultural features are overamplified at the cost of accuracy. We further show qualitatively-analyzed case studies that demonstrate how exoticism is not simply performed upon 'Global South' countries but also upon marginalized populations even in Western contexts, as we observe a similar exoticization of Indigenous populations in the 'Global North', and doubly upon marginalized populations within 'Global South' countries. We document implications for harm-aware usage patterns of such tools, and steps towards designing better GAI tools through community-centered endeavors.

Machine learning (ML), including deep learning (DL) and radiomics-based methods, is increasingly used for cancer outcome prediction with PET and SPECT imaging. However, the comparative performance of handcrafted radiomics features (HRF), deep radiomics features (DRF), DL models, and hybrid fusion approaches remains inconsistent across clinical applications. This systematic review analyzed 226 studies published from 2020 to 2025 that applied ML to PET or SPECT imaging for outcome prediction. Each study was evaluated using a 59-item framework covering dataset construction, feature extraction, validation methods, interpretability, and risk of bias. We extracted key details including model type, cancer site, imaging modality, and performance metrics such as accuracy and area under the curve (AUC). PET-based studies (95%) generally outperformed those using SPECT, likely due to higher spatial resolution and sensitivity. DRF models achieved the highest mean accuracy (0.862), while fusion models yielded the highest AUC (0.861). ANOVA confirmed significant differences in performance (accuracy: p=0.0006, AUC: p=0.0027). Common limitations included inadequate handling of class imbalance (59%), missing data (29%), and low population diversity (19%). Only 48% of studies adhered to IBSI standards. These findings highlight the need for standardized pipelines, improved data quality, and explainable AI to support clinical integration.

While gender bias in large language models (LLMs) has been extensively studied in many domains, uses of LLMs in e-commerce remain largely unexamined and may reveal novel forms of algorithmic bias and harm. Our work investigates this space, developing data-driven taxonomic categories of gender bias in the context of product description generation, which we situate with respect to existing general purpose harms taxonomies. We illustrate how AI-generated product descriptions can uniquely surface gender biases in ways that require specialized detection and mitigation approaches. Further, we quantitatively analyze issues corresponding to our taxonomic categories in two models used for this task -- GPT-3.5 and an e-commerce-specific LLM -- demonstrating that these forms of bias commonly occur in practice. Our results illuminate unique, under-explored dimensions of gender bias, such as assumptions about clothing size, stereotypical bias in which features of a product are advertised, and differences in the use of persuasive language. These insights contribute to our understanding of three types of AI harms identified by current frameworks: exclusionary norms, stereotyping, and performance disparities, particularly for the context of e-commerce.

This study examines cultural value alignment in large language models (LLMs) by analyzing how Gemini, ChatGPT, and DeepSeek prioritize values from Schwartz's value framework. Using the 40-item Portrait Values Questionnaire, we assessed whether DeepSeek, trained on Chinese-language data, exhibits distinct value preferences compared to Western models. Results of a Bayesian ordinal regression model show that self-transcendence values (e.g., benevolence, universalism) were highly prioritized across all models, reflecting a general LLM tendency to emphasize prosocial values. However, DeepSeek uniquely downplayed self-enhancement values (e.g., power, achievement) compared to ChatGPT and Gemini, aligning with collectivist cultural tendencies. These findings suggest that LLMs reflect culturally situated biases rather than a universal ethical framework. To address value asymmetries in LLMs, we propose multi-perspective reasoning, self-reflective feedback, and dynamic contextualization. This study contributes to discussions on AI fairness, cultural neutrality, and the need for pluralistic AI alignment frameworks that integrate diverse moral perspectives.

AI fairness, also known as algorithmic fairness, aims to ensure that algorithms operate without bias or discrimination towards any individual or group. Among various AI algorithms, the Fair Representation Learning (FRL) approach has gained significant interest in recent years. However, existing FRL algorithms have a limitation: they are primarily designed for categorical sensitive attributes and thus cannot be applied to continuous sensitive attributes, such as age or income. In this paper, we propose an FRL algorithm for continuous sensitive attributes. First, we introduce a measure called the Expectation of Integral Probability Metrics (EIPM) to assess the fairness level of representation space for continuous sensitive attributes. We demonstrate that if the distribution of the representation has a low EIPM value, then any prediction head constructed on the top of the representation become fair, regardless of the selection of the prediction head. Furthermore, EIPM possesses a distinguished advantage in that it can be accurately estimated using our proposed estimator with finite samples. Based on these properties, we propose a new FRL algorithm called Fair Representation using EIPM with MMD (FREM). Experimental evidences show that FREM outperforms other baseline methods.

As machine learning models are increasingly used in educational settings, from detecting at-risk students to predicting student performance, algorithmic bias and its potential impacts on students raise critical concerns about algorithmic fairness. Although group fairness is widely explored in education, works on individual fairness in a causal context are understudied, especially on counterfactual fairness. This paper explores the notion of counterfactual fairness for educational data by conducting counterfactual fairness analysis of machine learning models on benchmark educational datasets. We demonstrate that counterfactual fairness provides meaningful insight into the causality of sensitive attributes and causal-based individual fairness in education.

Advancements in retrieving accessible information have evolved faster in the last few years compared to the decades since the internet's creation. Search engines, like Google, have been the number one way to find relevant data. They have always relied on the user's abilities to find the best information in its billions of links and sources at everybody's fingertips. The advent of large language models (LLMs) has completely transformed the field of information retrieval. The LLMs excel not only at retrieving relevant knowledge but also at summarizing it effectively, making information more accessible and consumable for users. On top of it, the rise of AI Agents has introduced another aspect to information retrieval i.e. dynamic information retrieval which enables the integration of real-time data such as weather forecasts, and financial data with the knowledge base to curate context-aware knowledge. However, despite these advancements the agents remain susceptible to issues of bias and fairness, challenges deeply rooted within the knowledge base and training of LLMs. This study introduces a novel approach to bias-aware knowledge retrieval by leveraging agentic framework and the innovative use of bias detectors as tools to identify and highlight inherent biases in the retrieved content. By empowering users with transparency and awareness, this approach aims to foster more equitable information systems and promote the development of responsible AI.

The justice system has increasingly employed AI techniques to enhance efficiency, yet limitations remain in improving the quality of decision-making, particularly regarding transparency and explainability needed to uphold public trust in legal AI. To address these challenges, we propose a large language model based multi-agent framework named AgentsBench, which aims to simultaneously improve both efficiency and quality in judicial decision-making. Our approach leverages multiple LLM-driven agents that simulate the collaborative deliberation and decision making process of a judicial bench. We conducted experiments on legal judgment prediction task, and the results show that our framework outperforms existing LLM based methods in terms of performance and decision quality. By incorporating these elements, our framework reflects real-world judicial processes more closely, enhancing accuracy, fairness, and society consideration. AgentsBench provides a more nuanced and realistic methods of trustworthy AI decision-making, with strong potential for application across various case types and legal scenarios.

In recent years, much research has been dedicated to uncovering the environmental impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI), showing that training and deploying AI systems require large amounts of energy and resources, and the outcomes of AI may lead to decisions and actions that may negatively impact the environment. This new knowledge raises new ethical questions, such as: When is it (un)justifiable to develop an AI system, and how to make design choices, considering its environmental impact? However, so far, the environmental impact of AI has largely escaped ethical scrutiny, as AI ethics tends to focus strongly on themes such as transparency, privacy, safety, responsibility, and bias. Considering the environmental impact of AI from an ethical perspective expands the scope of AI ethics beyond an anthropocentric focus towards including more-than-human actors such as animals and ecosystems. This paper explores the ethical implications of the environmental impact of AI for designing AI systems by drawing on environmental justice literature, in which three categories of justice are distinguished, referring to three elements that can be unjust: the distribution of benefits and burdens (distributive justice), decision-making procedures (procedural justice), and institutionalized social norms (justice as recognition). Based on these tenets of justice, we outline criteria for developing environmentally just AI systems, given their ecological impact.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) research on AI Safety and social bias in AI has focused on safety for humans and social bias against human minorities. However, some AI ethicists have argued that the moral significance of nonhuman animals has been ignored in AI research. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate whether there is speciesism, i.e., discrimination against nonhuman animals, in NLP research. First, we explain why nonhuman animals are relevant in NLP research. Next, we survey the findings of existing research on speciesism in NLP researchers, data, and models and further investigate this problem in this study. The findings of this study suggest that speciesism exists within researchers, data, and models, respectively. Specifically, our survey and experiments show that (a) among NLP researchers, even those who study social bias in AI, do not recognize speciesism or speciesist bias; (b) among NLP data, speciesist bias is inherent in the data annotated in the datasets used to evaluate NLP models; (c) OpenAI GPTs, recent NLP models, exhibit speciesist bias by default. Finally, we discuss how we can reduce speciesism in NLP research.

Rater Cohesion and Quality from a Vicarious Perspective

Deepak Pandita, Tharindu Cyril Weerasooriya, Sujan Dutta +5

Human feedback is essential for building human-centered AI systems across domains where disagreement is prevalent, such as AI safety, content moderation, or sentiment analysis. Many disagreements, particularly in politically charged settings, arise because raters have opposing values or beliefs. Vicarious annotation is a method for breaking down disagreement by asking raters how they think others would annotate the data. In this paper, we explore the use of vicarious annotation with analytical methods for moderating rater disagreement. We employ rater cohesion metrics to study the potential influence of political affiliations and demographic backgrounds on raters' perceptions of offense. Additionally, we utilize CrowdTruth's rater quality metrics, which consider the demographics of the raters, to score the raters and their annotations. We study how the rater quality metrics influence the in-group and cross-group rater cohesion across the personal and vicarious levels.

The rapid expansion of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies has introduced both significant advancements and challenges, with diversity and inclusion (D&I) emerging as a critical concern. Addressing D&I in AI is essential to reduce biases and discrimination, enhance fairness, and prevent adverse societal impacts. Despite its importance, D&I considerations are often overlooked, resulting in incidents marked by built-in biases and ethical dilemmas. Analyzing AI incidents through a D&I lens is crucial for identifying causes of biases and developing strategies to mitigate them, ensuring fairer and more equitable AI technologies. However, systematic investigations of D&I-related AI incidents are scarce. This study addresses these challenges by identifying and understanding D&I issues within AI systems through a manual analysis of AI incident databases (AIID and AIAAIC). The research develops a decision tree to investigate D&I issues tied to AI incidents and populate a public repository of D&I-related AI incidents. The decision tree was validated through a card sorting exercise and focus group discussions. The research demonstrates that almost half of the analyzed AI incidents are related to D&I, with a notable predominance of racial, gender, and age discrimination. The decision tree and resulting public repository aim to foster further research and responsible AI practices, promoting the development of inclusive and equitable AI systems.