Research Papers

Novel data sensing and AI technologies are finding practical use in the analysis of crisis resilience, revealing the need to consider how responsible artificial intelligence (AI) practices can mitigate harmful outcomes and protect vulnerable populations. In this paper, we present a responsible AI roadmap that is embedded in the Crisis Information Management Circle. This roadmap includes six propositions to highlight and address important challenges and considerations specifically related to responsible AI for crisis resilience management. We cover a wide spectrum of interwoven challenges and considerations pertaining to the responsible collection, analysis, sharing, and use of information such as equity, fairness, biases, explainability and transparency, accountability, privacy and security, inter-organizational coordination, and public engagement. Through examining issues around AI systems for crisis resilience management, we dissect the inherent complexities of information management and decision-making in crises and highlight the urgency of responsible AI research and practice. The ideas laid out in this paper are the first attempt in establishing a roadmap for researchers, practitioners, developers, emergency managers, humanitarian organizations, and public officials to address important considerations for responsible AI pertaining to crisis resilience management.

This paper summarizes and evaluates various approaches, methods, and techniques for pursuing fairness in artificial intelligence (AI) systems. It examines the merits and shortcomings of these measures and proposes practical guidelines for defining, measuring, and preventing bias in AI. In particular, it cautions against some of the simplistic, yet common, methods for evaluating bias in AI systems, and offers more sophisticated and effective alternatives. The paper also addresses widespread controversies and confusions in the field by providing a common language among different stakeholders of high-impact AI systems. It describes various trade-offs involving AI fairness, and provides practical recommendations for balancing them. It offers techniques for evaluating the costs and benefits of fairness targets, and defines the role of human judgment in setting these targets. This paper provides discussions and guidelines for AI practitioners, organization leaders, and policymakers, as well as various links to additional materials for a more technical audience. Numerous real-world examples are provided to clarify the concepts, challenges, and recommendations from a practical perspective.

From mean-field to complex topologies: network effects on the algorithmic bias model

Valentina Pansanella, Giulio Rossetti, Letizia Milli

Nowadays, we live in a society where people often form their opinion by accessing and discussing contents shared on social networking websites. While these platforms have fostered information access and diffusion, they represent optimal environments for the proliferation of polluted contents, which is argued to be one of the co-causes of polarization/radicalization. Moreover, recommendation algorithms - intended to enhance platform usage - are likely to augment such phenomena, generating the so called Algorithmic Bias. In this work, we study the impact that different network topologies have on the formation and evolution of opinion in the context of a recent opinion dynamic model which includes bounded confidence and algorithmic bias. Mean-field, scale-free and random topologies, as well as networks generated by the Lancichinetti-Fortunato-Radicchi benchmark, are compared in terms of opinion fragmentation/polarization and time to convergence.

The issue of fairness in machine learning stems from the fact that historical data often displays biases against specific groups of people which have been underprivileged in the recent past, or still are. In this context, one of the possible approaches is to employ fair representation learning algorithms which are able to remove biases from data, making groups statistically indistinguishable. In this paper, we instead develop a fair representation learning algorithm which is able to map individuals belonging to different groups in a single group. This is made possible by training a pair of Normalizing Flow models and constraining them to not remove information about the ground truth by training a ranking or classification model on top of them. The overall, ``chained'' model is invertible and has a tractable Jacobian, which allows to relate together the probability densities for different groups and ``translate'' individuals from one group to another. We show experimentally that our methodology is competitive with other fair representation learning algorithms. Furthermore, our algorithm achieves stronger invariance w.r.t. the sensitive attribute.

Matched sample selection with GANs for mitigating attribute confounding

Chandan Singh, Guha Balakrishnan, Pietro Perona

Measuring biases of vision systems with respect to protected attributes like gender and age is critical as these systems gain widespread use in society. However, significant correlations between attributes in benchmark datasets make it difficult to separate algorithmic bias from dataset bias. To mitigate such attribute confounding during bias analysis, we propose a matching approach that selects a subset of images from the full dataset with balanced attribute distributions across protected attributes. Our matching approach first projects real images onto a generative adversarial network (GAN)'s latent space in a manner that preserves semantic attributes. It then finds image matches in this latent space across a chosen protected attribute, yielding a dataset where semantic and perceptual attributes are balanced across the protected attribute. We validate projection and matching strategies with qualitative, quantitative, and human annotation experiments. We demonstrate our work in the context of gender bias in multiple open-source facial-recognition classifiers and find that bias persists after removing key confounders via matching. Code and documentation to reproduce the results here and apply the methods to new data is available at https://github.com/csinva/matching-with-gans .

Deploying trustworthy AI systems requires principled uncertainty quantification. Conformal prediction (CP) is a widely used framework for constructing prediction sets with distribution-free coverage guarantees. In many practical settings, including healthcare, finance, and mobile sensing, the calibration data required for CP are distributed across multiple clients, each with its own local data distribution. In this federated setting, data can often be partitioned into, potentially overlapping, groups, which may reflect client-specific strata or cross-cutting attributes such as demographic or semantic categories. We propose group-conditional federated conformal prediction (GC-FCP), a federated extension of conditional conformal calibration for a target mixture over prespecified groups. GC-FCP constructs mergeable, atom-stratified coresets from local calibration scores, enabling compact aggregation at the server when the number of active atoms is moderate. Experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets validate the performance of GC-FCP compared to centralized calibration baselines. The code of our work can be found at https://github.com/HaifengWen/GC-FCP.

This paper presents an overview of the Recognize the Unseen: Unusual Behavior Recognition from Pose Data Challenge, hosted at ISAS 2025. The challenge aims to address the critical need for automated recognition of unusual behaviors in facilities for individuals with developmental disabilities using non-invasive pose estimation data. Participating teams were tasked with distinguishing between normal and unusual activities based on skeleton keypoints extracted from video recordings of simulated scenarios. The dataset reflects real-world imbalance and temporal irregularities in behavior, and the evaluation adopted a Leave-One-Subject-Out (LOSO) strategy to ensure subject-agnostic generalization. The challenge attracted broad participation from 40 teams applying diverse approaches ranging from classical machine learning to deep learning architectures. Submissions were assessed primarily using macro-averaged F1 scores to account for class imbalance. The results highlight the difficulty of modeling rare, abrupt actions in noisy, low-dimensional data, and emphasize the importance of capturing both temporal and contextual nuances in behavior modeling. Insights from this challenge may contribute to future developments in socially responsible AI applications for healthcare and behavior monitoring.

PluriHarms: Benchmarking the Full Spectrum of Human Judgments on AI Harm

Jing-Jing Li, Joel Mire, Eve Fleisig +4

Current AI safety frameworks, which often treat harmfulness as binary, lack the flexibility to handle borderline cases where humans meaningfully disagree. To build more pluralistic systems, it is essential to move beyond consensus and instead understand where and why disagreements arise. We introduce PluriHarms, a benchmark designed to systematically study human harm judgments across two key dimensions -- the harm axis (benign to harmful) and the agreement axis (agreement to disagreement). Our scalable framework generates prompts that capture diverse AI harms and human values while targeting cases with high disagreement rates, validated by human data. The benchmark includes 150 prompts with 15,000 ratings from 100 human annotators, enriched with demographic and psychological traits and prompt-level features of harmful actions, effects, and values. Our analyses show that prompts that relate to imminent risks and tangible harms amplify perceived harmfulness, while annotator traits (e.g., toxicity experience, education) and their interactions with prompt content explain systematic disagreement. We benchmark AI safety models and alignment methods on PluriHarms, finding that while personalization significantly improves prediction of human harm judgments, considerable room remains for future progress. By explicitly targeting value diversity and disagreement, our work provides a principled benchmark for moving beyond "one-size-fits-all" safety toward pluralistically safe AI.

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.

Accurate pain assessment in patients with limited ability to communicate, such as older adults with severe dementia, represents a critical healthcare challenge. Robust automated systems of pain behavior detection may facilitate such assessments. Existing pain detection datasets, however, suffer from limited ethnic/racial diversity, privacy constraints, and underrepresentation of older adults who are the primary target population for clinical deployment. We present SynPAIN, a large-scale synthetic dataset containing 10,710 facial expression images across five ethnicities/races, representing two age groups, and two genders. Using commercial generative AI tools, we created demographically balanced synthetic identities with clinically meaningful pain expressions. Our validation demonstrates that synthetic pain expressions exhibit expected pain patterns, scoring significantly higher than neutral and non-pain expressions using clinically validated pain assessment tools based on facial action unit analysis. We experimentally demonstrate SynPAIN's utility in identifying algorithmic bias in existing pain detection models. Through comprehensive bias evaluation, we reveal substantial performance disparities across demographics characteristics. These performance disparities were previously undetectable with smaller, less diverse datasets. Furthermore, we demonstrate that age-matched synthetic data augmentation improves pain detection performance on real clinical data, achieving a 2.4 percentage point improvement in average precision. SynPAIN addresses critical gaps in pain assessment research by providing the first publicly available, demographically diverse synthetic dataset specifically designed for older adult pain detection, while establishing a framework for measuring and mitigating algorithmic bias. The dataset, code, and trained models is available at https://mmzml.github.io/SynPAIN