Research Papers

Generative audio models typically focus their applications in music and speech generation, with recent models having human-like quality in their audio output. This paper conducts a systematic literature review of 884 papers in the area of generative audio models in order to both quantify the degree to which researchers in the field are considering potential negative impacts and identify the types of ethical implications researchers in this area need to consider. Though 65% of generative audio research papers note positive potential impacts of their work, less than 10% discuss any negative impacts. This jarringly small percentage of papers considering negative impact is particularly worrying because the issues brought to light by the few papers doing so are raising serious ethical implications and concerns relevant to the broader field such as the potential for fraud, deep-fakes, and copyright infringement. By quantifying this lack of ethical consideration in generative audio research and identifying key areas of potential harm, this paper lays the groundwork for future work in the field at a critical point in time in order to guide more conscientious research as this field progresses.

Private and public sector structures and norms refine how emerging technology is used in practice. In healthcare, despite a proliferation of AI adoption, the organizational governance surrounding its use and integration is often poorly understood. What the Health AI Partnership (HAIP) aims to do in this research is to better define the requirements for adequate organizational governance of AI systems in healthcare settings and support health system leaders to make more informed decisions around AI adoption. To work towards this understanding, we first identify how the standards for the AI adoption in healthcare may be designed to be used easily and efficiently. Then, we map out the precise decision points involved in the practical institutional adoption of AI technology within specific health systems. Practically, we achieve this through a multi-organizational collaboration with leaders from major health systems across the United States and key informants from related fields. Working with the consultancy IDEO [dot] org, we were able to conduct usability-testing sessions with healthcare and AI ethics professionals. Usability analysis revealed a prototype structured around mock key decision points that align with how organizational leaders approach technology adoption. Concurrently, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 89 professionals in healthcare and other relevant fields. Using a modified grounded theory approach, we were able to identify 8 key decision points and comprehensive procedures throughout the AI adoption lifecycle. This is one of the most detailed qualitative analyses to date of the current governance structures and processes involved in AI adoption by health systems in the United States. We hope these findings can inform future efforts to build capabilities to promote the safe, effective, and responsible adoption of emerging technologies in healthcare.

Explainable Fairness in Recommendation

Yingqiang Ge, Juntao Tan, Yan Zhu +7

Existing research on fairness-aware recommendation has mainly focused on the quantification of fairness and the development of fair recommendation models, neither of which studies a more substantial problem--identifying the underlying reason of model disparity in recommendation. This information is critical for recommender system designers to understand the intrinsic recommendation mechanism and provides insights on how to improve model fairness to decision makers. Fortunately, with the rapid development of Explainable AI, we can use model explainability to gain insights into model (un)fairness. In this paper, we study the problem of explainable fairness, which helps to gain insights about why a system is fair or unfair, and guides the design of fair recommender systems with a more informed and unified methodology. Particularly, we focus on a common setting with feature-aware recommendation and exposure unfairness, but the proposed explainable fairness framework is general and can be applied to other recommendation settings and fairness definitions. We propose a Counterfactual Explainable Fairness framework, called CEF, which generates explanations about model fairness that can improve the fairness without significantly hurting the performance.The CEF framework formulates an optimization problem to learn the "minimal" change of the input features that changes the recommendation results to a certain level of fairness. Based on the counterfactual recommendation result of each feature, we calculate an explainability score in terms of the fairness-utility trade-off to rank all the feature-based explanations, and select the top ones as fairness explanations.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become prevalent in our everyday technologies and impacts both individuals and communities. The explainable AI (XAI) scholarship has explored the philosophical nature of explanation and technical explanations, which are usually driven by experts in lab settings and can be challenging for laypersons to understand. In addition, existing XAI research tends to focus on the individual level. Little is known about how people understand and explain AI-led decisions in the community context. Drawing from XAI and activity theory, a foundational HCI theory, we theorize how explanation is situated in a community's shared values, norms, knowledge, and practices, and how situated explanation mediates community-AI interaction. We then present a case study of AI-led moderation, where community members collectively develop explanations of AI-led decisions, most of which are automated punishments. Lastly, we discuss the implications of this framework at the intersection of CSCW, HCI, and XAI.

Unethical Research: How to Create a Malevolent Artificial Intelligence

Federico Pistono, Roman V. Yampolskiy

Cybersecurity research involves publishing papers about malicious exploits as much as publishing information on how to design tools to protect cyber-infrastructure. It is this information exchange between ethical hackers and security experts, which results in a well-balanced cyber-ecosystem. In the blooming domain of AI Safety Engineering, hundreds of papers have been published on different proposals geared at the creation of a safe machine, yet nothing, to our knowledge, has been published on how to design a malevolent machine. Availability of such information would be of great value particularly to computer scientists, mathematicians, and others who have an interest in AI safety, and who are attempting to avoid the spontaneous emergence or the deliberate creation of a dangerous AI, which can negatively affect human activities and in the worst case cause the complete obliteration of the human species. This paper provides some general guidelines for the creation of a Malevolent Artificial Intelligence (MAI).

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is a critical aspect of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, particularly in high-risk domains such as healthcare, autonomous systems, and financial technology, where decision-making processes must account for uncertainty. This review explores the evolution of uncertainty quantification techniques in AI, distinguishing between aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties, and discusses the mathematical foundations and methods used to quantify these uncertainties. We provide an overview of advanced techniques, including probabilistic methods, ensemble learning, sampling-based approaches, and generative models, while also highlighting hybrid approaches that integrate domain-specific knowledge. Furthermore, we examine the diverse applications of UQ across various fields, emphasizing its impact on decision-making, predictive accuracy, and system robustness. The review also addresses key challenges such as scalability, efficiency, and integration with explainable AI, and outlines future directions for research in this rapidly developing area. Through this comprehensive survey, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of UQ's role in enhancing the reliability, safety, and trustworthiness of AI systems.

Chatbot Companionship: A Mixed-Methods Study of Companion Chatbot Usage Patterns and Their Relationship to Loneliness in Active Users

Auren R. Liu, Pat Pataranutaporn, Pattie Maes

Companion chatbots offer a potential solution to the growing epidemic of loneliness, but their impact on users' psychosocial well-being remains poorly understood, raising critical ethical questions about their deployment and design. This study presents a large-scale survey (n = 404) of regular users of companion chatbots, investigating the relationship between chatbot usage and loneliness. We develop a model explaining approximately 50% of variance in loneliness; while usage does not directly predict loneliness, we identify factors including neuroticism, social network size, and problematic use. Through cluster analysis and mixed-methods thematic analysis combining manual coding with automated theme extraction, we identify seven distinct user profiles demonstrating that companion chatbots can either enhance or potentially harm psychological well-being depending on user characteristics. Different usage patterns can lead to markedly different outcomes, with some users experiencing enhanced social confidence while others risk further isolation. These findings have significant implications for responsible AI development, suggesting that one-size-fits-all approaches to AI companionship may be ethically problematic. Our work contributes to the ongoing dialogue about the role of AI in social and emotional support, offering insights for developing more targeted and ethical approaches to AI companionship that complement rather than replace human connections.

The field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) often focuses on users with a strong technical background, making it challenging for non-experts to understand XAI methods. This paper presents "x-[plAIn]", a new approach to make XAI more accessible to a wider audience through a custom Large Language Model (LLM), developed using ChatGPT Builder. Our goal was to design a model that can generate clear, concise summaries of various XAI methods, tailored for different audiences, including business professionals and academics. The key feature of our model is its ability to adapt explanations to match each audience group's knowledge level and interests. Our approach still offers timely insights, facilitating the decision-making process by the end users. Results from our use-case studies show that our model is effective in providing easy-to-understand, audience-specific explanations, regardless of the XAI method used. This adaptability improves the accessibility of XAI, bridging the gap between complex AI technologies and their practical applications. Our findings indicate a promising direction for LLMs in making advanced AI concepts more accessible to a diverse range of users.

Colleges and universities are increasingly turning to algorithms that predict college-student success to inform various decisions, including those related to admissions, budgeting, and student-success interventions. Because predictive algorithms rely on historical data, they capture societal injustices, including racism. In this study, we examine how the accuracy of college student success predictions differs between racialized groups, signaling algorithmic bias. We also evaluate the utility of leading bias-mitigating techniques in addressing this bias. Using nationally representative data from the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 and various machine learning modeling approaches, we demonstrate how models incorporating commonly used features to predict college-student success are less accurate when predicting success for racially minoritized students. Common approaches to mitigating algorithmic bias are generally ineffective at eliminating disparities in prediction outcomes and accuracy between racialized groups.

A Human Rights-Based Approach to Responsible AI

Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Margaret Mitchell, Timnit Gebru +1

Research on fairness, accountability, transparency and ethics of AI-based interventions in society has gained much-needed momentum in recent years. However it lacks an explicit alignment with a set of normative values and principles that guide this research and interventions. Rather, an implicit consensus is often assumed to hold for the values we impart into our models - something that is at odds with the pluralistic world we live in. In this paper, we put forth the doctrine of universal human rights as a set of globally salient and cross-culturally recognized set of values that can serve as a grounding framework for explicit value alignment in responsible AI - and discuss its efficacy as a framework for civil society partnership and participation. We argue that a human rights framework orients the research in this space away from the machines and the risks of their biases, and towards humans and the risks to their rights, essentially helping to center the conversation around who is harmed, what harms they face, and how those harms may be mitigated.

Explainable AI for Android Malware Detection: Towards Understanding Why the Models Perform So Well?

Yue Liu, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, Li Li +1

Machine learning (ML)-based Android malware detection has been one of the most popular research topics in the mobile security community. An increasing number of research studies have demonstrated that machine learning is an effective and promising approach for malware detection, and some works have even claimed that their proposed models could achieve 99\% detection accuracy, leaving little room for further improvement. However, numerous prior studies have suggested that unrealistic experimental designs bring substantial biases, resulting in over-optimistic performance in malware detection. Unlike previous research that examined the detection performance of ML classifiers to locate the causes, this study employs Explainable AI (XAI) approaches to explore what ML-based models learned during the training process, inspecting and interpreting why ML-based malware classifiers perform so well under unrealistic experimental settings. We discover that temporal sample inconsistency in the training dataset brings over-optimistic classification performance (up to 99\% F1 score and accuracy). Importantly, our results indicate that ML models classify malware based on temporal differences between malware and benign, rather than the actual malicious behaviors. Our evaluation also confirms the fact that unrealistic experimental designs lead to not only unrealistic detection performance but also poor reliability, posing a significant obstacle to real-world applications. These findings suggest that XAI approaches should be used to help practitioners/researchers better understand how do AI/ML models (i.e., malware detection) work -- not just focusing on accuracy improvement.

OmniXAI: A Library for Explainable AI

Wenzhuo Yang, Hung Le, Tanmay Laud +2

We introduce OmniXAI (short for Omni eXplainable AI), an open-source Python library of eXplainable AI (XAI), which offers omni-way explainable AI capabilities and various interpretable machine learning techniques to address the pain points of understanding and interpreting the decisions made by machine learning (ML) in practice. OmniXAI aims to be a one-stop comprehensive library that makes explainable AI easy for data scientists, ML researchers and practitioners who need explanation for various types of data, models and explanation methods at different stages of ML process (data exploration, feature engineering, model development, evaluation, and decision-making, etc). In particular, our library includes a rich family of explanation methods integrated in a unified interface, which supports multiple data types (tabular data, images, texts, time-series), multiple types of ML models (traditional ML in Scikit-learn and deep learning models in PyTorch/TensorFlow), and a range of diverse explanation methods including "model-specific" and "model-agnostic" ones (such as feature-attribution explanation, counterfactual explanation, gradient-based explanation, etc). For practitioners, the library provides an easy-to-use unified interface to generate the explanations for their applications by only writing a few lines of codes, and also a GUI dashboard for visualization of different explanations for more insights about decisions. In this technical report, we present OmniXAI's design principles, system architectures, and major functionalities, and also demonstrate several example use cases across different types of data, tasks, and models.