Research Papers

The development of Generative AI Large Language Models (LLMs) raised the alarm regarding identifying content produced through generative AI or humans. In one case, issues arise when students heavily rely on such tools in a manner that can affect the development of their writing or coding skills. Other issues of plagiarism also apply. This study aims to support efforts to detect and identify textual content generated using LLM tools. We hypothesize that LLMs-generated text is detectable by machine learning (ML), and investigate ML models that can recognize and differentiate texts generated by multiple LLMs tools. We leverage several ML and Deep Learning (DL) algorithms such as Random Forest (RF), and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN), and utilized Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) to understand the important features in attribution. Our method is divided into 1) binary classification to differentiate between human-written and AI-text, and 2) multi classification, to differentiate between human-written text and the text generated by the five different LLM tools (ChatGPT, LLaMA, Google Bard, Claude, and Perplexity). Results show high accuracy in the multi and binary classification. Our model outperformed GPTZero with 98.5\% accuracy to 78.3\%. Notably, GPTZero was unable to recognize about 4.2\% of the observations, but our model was able to recognize the complete test dataset. XAI results showed that understanding feature importance across different classes enables detailed author/source profiles. Further, aiding in attribution and supporting plagiarism detection by highlighting unique stylistic and structural elements ensuring robust content originality verification.

Integrating AI in healthcare can greatly improve patient care and system efficiency. However, the lack of explainability in AI systems (XAI) hinders their clinical adoption, especially in multimodal settings that use increasingly complex model architectures. Most existing XAI methods focus on unimodal models, which fail to capture cross-modal interactions crucial for understanding the combined impact of multiple data sources. Existing methods for quantifying cross-modal interactions are limited to two modalities, rely on labelled data, and depend on model performance. This is problematic in healthcare, where XAI must handle multiple data sources and provide individualised explanations. This paper introduces InterSHAP, a cross-modal interaction score that addresses the limitations of existing approaches. InterSHAP uses the Shapley interaction index to precisely separate and quantify the contributions of the individual modalities and their interactions without approximations. By integrating an open-source implementation with the SHAP package, we enhance reproducibility and ease of use. We show that InterSHAP accurately measures the presence of cross-modal interactions, can handle multiple modalities, and provides detailed explanations at a local level for individual samples. Furthermore, we apply InterSHAP to multimodal medical datasets and demonstrate its applicability for individualised explanations.

As trustworthy AI continues to advance, the fairness issue in recommendations has received increasing attention. A recommender system is considered unfair when it produces unequal outcomes for different user groups based on user-sensitive attributes (e.g., age, gender). Some researchers have proposed data augmentation-based methods aiming at alleviating user-level unfairness by altering the skewed distribution of training data among various user groups. Despite yielding promising results, they often rely on fairness-related assumptions that may not align with reality, potentially reducing the data quality and negatively affecting model effectiveness. To tackle this issue, in this paper, we study how to implement high-quality data augmentation to improve recommendation fairness. Specifically, we propose FairDgcl, a dynamic graph adversarial contrastive learning framework aiming at improving fairness in recommender system. First, FairDgcl develops an adversarial contrastive network with a view generator and a view discriminator to learn generating fair augmentation strategies in an adversarial style. Then, we propose two dynamic, learnable models to generate contrastive views within contrastive learning framework, which automatically fine-tune the augmentation strategies. Meanwhile, we theoretically show that FairDgcl can simultaneously generate enhanced representations that possess both fairness and accuracy. Lastly, comprehensive experiments conducted on four real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed FairDgcl.

Recent advancements in AI safety have led to increased efforts in training and red-teaming large language models (LLMs) to mitigate unsafe content generation. However, these safety mechanisms may not be comprehensive, leaving potential vulnerabilities unexplored. This paper introduces MathPrompt, a novel jailbreaking technique that exploits LLMs' advanced capabilities in symbolic mathematics to bypass their safety mechanisms. By encoding harmful natural language prompts into mathematical problems, we demonstrate a critical vulnerability in current AI safety measures. Our experiments across 13 state-of-the-art LLMs reveal an average attack success rate of 73.6\%, highlighting the inability of existing safety training mechanisms to generalize to mathematically encoded inputs. Analysis of embedding vectors shows a substantial semantic shift between original and encoded prompts, helping explain the attack's success. This work emphasizes the importance of a holistic approach to AI safety, calling for expanded red-teaming efforts to develop robust safeguards across all potential input types and their associated risks.

Exploring Bias and Prediction Metrics to Characterise the Fairness of Machine Learning for Equity-Centered Public Health Decision-Making: A Narrative Review

Shaina Raza, Arash Shaban-Nejad, Elham Dolatabadi +1

Background: The rapid advancement of Machine Learning (ML) represents novel opportunities to enhance public health research, surveillance, and decision-making. However, there is a lack of comprehensive understanding of algorithmic bias, systematic errors in predicted population health outcomes, resulting from the public health application of ML. The objective of this narrative review is to explore the types of bias generated by ML and quantitative metrics to assess these biases. Methods : We performed search on PubMed, MEDLINE, IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers), ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) Digital Library, Science Direct, and Springer Nature. We used keywords to identify studies describing types of bias and metrics to measure these in the domain of ML and public and population health published in English between 2008 and 2023, inclusive. Results: A total of 72 articles met the inclusion criteria. Our review identified the commonly described types of bias and quantitative metrics to assess these biases from an equity perspective. Conclusion : The review will help formalize the evaluation framework for ML on public health from an equity perspective.

Are Large Language Models Moral Hypocrites? A Study Based on Moral Foundations

José Luiz Nunes, Guilherme F. C. F. Almeida, Marcelo de Araujo +1

Large language models (LLMs) have taken centre stage in debates on Artificial Intelligence. Yet there remains a gap in how to assess LLMs' conformity to important human values. In this paper, we investigate whether state-of-the-art LLMs, GPT-4 and Claude 2.1 (Gemini Pro and LLAMA 2 did not generate valid results) are moral hypocrites. We employ two research instruments based on the Moral Foundations Theory: (i) the Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ), which investigates which values are considered morally relevant in abstract moral judgements; and (ii) the Moral Foundations Vignettes (MFVs), which evaluate moral cognition in concrete scenarios related to each moral foundation. We characterise conflicts in values between these different abstractions of moral evaluation as hypocrisy. We found that both models displayed reasonable consistency within each instrument compared to humans, but they displayed contradictory and hypocritical behaviour when we compared the abstract values present in the MFQ to the evaluation of concrete moral violations of the MFV.

In an era of model and data proliferation in machine learning/AI especially marked by the rapid advancement of open-sourced technologies, there arises a critical need for standardized consistent documentation. Our work addresses the information incompleteness in current human-generated model and data cards. We propose an automated generation approach using Large Language Models (LLMs). Our key contributions include the establishment of CardBench, a comprehensive dataset aggregated from over 4.8k model cards and 1.4k data cards, coupled with the development of the CardGen pipeline comprising a two-step retrieval process. Our approach exhibits enhanced completeness, objectivity, and faithfulness in generated model and data cards, a significant step in responsible AI documentation practices ensuring better accountability and traceability.

Organizations including companies, nonprofits, governments, and academic institutions are increasingly developing, deploying, and utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) tools. Responsible AI (RAI) governance approaches at organizations have emerged as important mechanisms to address potential AI risks and harms. In this work, we interviewed 17 technical contributors across organization types (Academic, Government, Industry, Nonprofit) and sectors (Finance, Health, Tech, Other) about their experiences with internal RAI governance. Our findings illuminated the variety of organizational definitions of RAI and accompanying internal governance approaches. We summarized the first detailed findings on algorithm review boards (ARBs) and similar review committees in practice, including their membership, scope, and measures of success. We confirmed known robust model governance in finance sectors and revealed extensive algorithm and AI governance with ARB-like review boards in health sectors. Our findings contradict the idea that Institutional Review Boards alone are sufficient for algorithm governance and posit that ARBs are among the more impactful internal RAI governance approaches. Our results suggest that integration with existing internal regulatory approaches and leadership buy-in are among the most important attributes for success and that financial tensions are the greatest challenge to effective organizational RAI. We make a variety of suggestions for how organizational partners can learn from these findings when building their own internal RAI frameworks. We outline future directions for developing and measuring effectiveness of ARBs and other internal RAI governance approaches.

Exploring Variational Auto-Encoder Architectures, Configurations, and Datasets for Generative Music Explainable AI

Nick Bryan-Kinns, Bingyuan Zhang, Songyan Zhao +1

Generative AI models for music and the arts in general are increasingly complex and hard to understand. The field of eXplainable AI (XAI) seeks to make complex and opaque AI models such as neural networks more understandable to people. One approach to making generative AI models more understandable is to impose a small number of semantically meaningful attributes on generative AI models. This paper contributes a systematic examination of the impact that different combinations of Variational Auto-Encoder models (MeasureVAE and AdversarialVAE), configurations of latent space in the AI model (from 4 to 256 latent dimensions), and training datasets (Irish folk, Turkish folk, Classical, and pop) have on music generation performance when 2 or 4 meaningful musical attributes are imposed on the generative model. To date there have been no systematic comparisons of such models at this level of combinatorial detail. Our findings show that MeasureVAE has better reconstruction performance than AdversarialVAE which has better musical attribute independence. Results demonstrate that MeasureVAE was able to generate music across music genres with interpretable musical dimensions of control, and performs best with low complexity music such a pop and rock. We recommend that a 32 or 64 latent dimensional space is optimal for 4 regularised dimensions when using MeasureVAE to generate music across genres. Our results are the first detailed comparisons of configurations of state-of-the-art generative AI models for music and can be used to help select and configure AI models, musical features, and datasets for more understandable generation of music.

Bias in applications of machine learning (ML) to healthcare is usually attributed to unrepresentative or incomplete data, or to underlying health disparities. This article identifies a more pervasive source of bias that affects the clinical utility of ML-enabled prediction tools: target specification bias. Target specification bias arises when the operationalization of the target variable does not match its definition by decision makers. The mismatch is often subtle, and stems from the fact that decision makers are typically interested in predicting the outcomes of counterfactual, rather than actual, healthcare scenarios. Target specification bias persists independently of data limitations and health disparities. When left uncorrected, it gives rise to an overestimation of predictive accuracy, to inefficient utilization of medical resources, and to suboptimal decisions that can harm patients. Recent work in metrology - the science of measurement - suggests ways of counteracting target specification bias and avoiding its harmful consequences.

Delivering Inflated Explanations

Yacine Izza, Alexey Ignatiev, Peter Stuckey +1

In the quest for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) one of the questions that frequently arises given a decision made by an AI system is, ``why was the decision made in this way?'' Formal approaches to explainability build a formal model of the AI system and use this to reason about the properties of the system. Given a set of feature values for an instance to be explained, and a resulting decision, a formal abductive explanation is a set of features, such that if they take the given value will always lead to the same decision. This explanation is useful, it shows that only some features were used in making the final decision. But it is narrow, it only shows that if the selected features take their given values the decision is unchanged. It's possible that some features may change values and still lead to the same decision. In this paper we formally define inflated explanations which is a set of features, and for each feature of set of values (always including the value of the instance being explained), such that the decision will remain unchanged. Inflated explanations are more informative than abductive explanations since e.g they allow us to see if the exact value of a feature is important, or it could be any nearby value. Overall they allow us to better understand the role of each feature in the decision. We show that we can compute inflated explanations for not that much greater cost than abductive explanations, and that we can extend duality results for abductive explanations also to inflated explanations.

The recent release of large language model (LLM) based chatbots, such as ChatGPT, has attracted huge interest in foundation models. It is widely believed that foundation models will serve as the fundamental building blocks for future AI systems. As foundation models are in their early stages, the design of foundation model based systems has not yet been systematically explored. There is limited understanding about the impact of introducing foundation models in software architecture. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a taxonomy of foundation model based systems, which classifies and compares the characteristics of foundation models and design options of foundation model based systems. Our taxonomy comprises three categories: the pretraining and adaptation of foundation models, the architecture design of foundation model based systems, and responsible-AI-by-design. This taxonomy can serve as concrete guidance for making major architectural design decisions when designing foundation model based systems and highlights trade-offs arising from design decisions.