Research Papers

Recent years have witnessed an increasing number of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in transportation. As a new and emerging technology, AI's potential to advance transportation goals and the full extent of its impacts on the transportation sector is not yet well understood. As the transportation community explores these topics, it is critical to understand how transportation professionals, the driving force behind AI Transportation applications, perceive AI's potential efficiency and equity impacts. Toward this goal, we surveyed transportation professionals in the United States and collected a total of 354 responses. Based on the survey responses, we conducted both descriptive analysis and latent class cluster analysis (LCCA). The former provides an overview of prevalent attitudes among transportation professionals, while the latter allows the identification of distinct segments based on their latent attitudes toward AI. We find widespread optimism regarding AI's potential to improve many aspects of transportation (e.g., efficiency, cost reduction, and traveler experience); however, responses are mixed regarding AI's potential to advance equity. Moreover, many respondents are concerned that AI ethics are not well understood in the transportation community and that AI use in transportation could exaggerate existing inequalities. Through LCCA, we have identified four latent segments: AI Neutral, AI Optimist, AI Pessimist, and AI Skeptic. The latent class membership is significantly associated with respondents' age, education level, and AI knowledge level. Overall, the study results shed light on the extent to which the transportation community as a whole is ready to leverage AI systems to transform current practices and inform targeted education to improve the understanding of AI among transportation professionals.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has made its way into various scientific fields, providing astonishing improvements over existing algorithms for a wide variety of tasks. In recent years, there have been severe concerns over the trustworthiness of AI technologies. The scientific community has focused on the development of trustworthy AI algorithms. However, machine and deep learning algorithms, popular in the AI community today, depend heavily on the data used during their development. These learning algorithms identify patterns in the data, learning the behavioral objective. Any flaws in the data have the potential to translate directly into algorithms. In this study, we discuss the importance of Responsible Machine Learning Datasets and propose a framework to evaluate the datasets through a responsible rubric. While existing work focuses on the post-hoc evaluation of algorithms for their trustworthiness, we provide a framework that considers the data component separately to understand its role in the algorithm. We discuss responsible datasets through the lens of fairness, privacy, and regulatory compliance and provide recommendations for constructing future datasets. After surveying over 100 datasets, we use 60 datasets for analysis and demonstrate that none of these datasets is immune to issues of fairness, privacy preservation, and regulatory compliance. We provide modifications to the ``datasheets for datasets" with important additions for improved dataset documentation. With governments around the world regularizing data protection laws, the method for the creation of datasets in the scientific community requires revision. We believe this study is timely and relevant in today's era of AI.

Ensuring a neural network is not relying on protected attributes (e.g., race, sex, age) for predictions is crucial in advancing fair and trustworthy AI. While several promising methods for removing attribute bias in neural networks have been proposed, their limitations remain under-explored. In this work, we mathematically and empirically reveal an important limitation of attribute bias removal methods in presence of strong bias. Specifically, we derive a general non-vacuous information-theoretical upper bound on the performance of any attribute bias removal method in terms of the bias strength. We provide extensive experiments on synthetic, image, and census datasets to verify the theoretical bound and its consequences in practice. Our findings show that existing attribute bias removal methods are effective only when the inherent bias in the dataset is relatively weak, thus cautioning against the use of these methods in smaller datasets where strong attribute bias can occur, and advocating the need for methods that can overcome this limitation.

Causal Adversarial Perturbations for Individual Fairness and Robustness in Heterogeneous Data Spaces

Ahmad-Reza Ehyaei, Kiarash Mohammadi, Amir-Hossein Karimi +2

As responsible AI gains importance in machine learning algorithms, properties such as fairness, adversarial robustness, and causality have received considerable attention in recent years. However, despite their individual significance, there remains a critical gap in simultaneously exploring and integrating these properties. In this paper, we propose a novel approach that examines the relationship between individual fairness, adversarial robustness, and structural causal models in heterogeneous data spaces, particularly when dealing with discrete sensitive attributes. We use causal structural models and sensitive attributes to create a fair metric and apply it to measure semantic similarity among individuals. By introducing a novel causal adversarial perturbation and applying adversarial training, we create a new regularizer that combines individual fairness, causality, and robustness in the classifier. Our method is evaluated on both real-world and synthetic datasets, demonstrating its effectiveness in achieving an accurate classifier that simultaneously exhibits fairness, adversarial robustness, and causal awareness.

PWSHAP: A Path-Wise Explanation Model for Targeted Variables

Lucile Ter-Minassian, Oscar Clivio, Karla Diaz-Ordaz +2

Predictive black-box models can exhibit high accuracy but their opaque nature hinders their uptake in safety-critical deployment environments. Explanation methods (XAI) can provide confidence for decision-making through increased transparency. However, existing XAI methods are not tailored towards models in sensitive domains where one predictor is of special interest, such as a treatment effect in a clinical model, or ethnicity in policy models. We introduce Path-Wise Shapley effects (PWSHAP), a framework for assessing the targeted effect of a binary (e.g.~treatment) variable from a complex outcome model. Our approach augments the predictive model with a user-defined directed acyclic graph (DAG). The method then uses the graph alongside on-manifold Shapley values to identify effects along causal pathways whilst maintaining robustness to adversarial attacks. We establish error bounds for the identified path-wise Shapley effects and for Shapley values. We show PWSHAP can perform local bias and mediation analyses with faithfulness to the model. Further, if the targeted variable is randomised we can quantify local effect modification. We demonstrate the resolution, interpretability, and true locality of our approach on examples and a real-world experiment.

Social networks have been widely studied over the last century from multiple disciplines to understand societal issues such as inequality in employment rates, managerial performance, and epidemic spread. Today, these and many more issues can be studied at global scale thanks to the digital footprints that we generate when browsing the Web or using social media platforms. Unfortunately, scientists often struggle to access to such data primarily because it is proprietary, and even when it is shared with privacy guarantees, such data is either no representative or too big. In this tutorial, we will discuss recent advances and future directions in network modeling. In particular, we focus on how to exploit synthetic networks to study real-world problems such as data privacy, spreading dynamics, algorithmic bias, and ranking inequalities. We start by reviewing different types of generative models for social networks including node-attributed and scale-free networks. Then, we showcase how to perform a network selection analysis to characterize the mechanisms of edge formation of any given real-world network.

This paper follows calls for critical approaches to computing and conceptualisations of intersectional, feminist, decolonial HCI and AI design and asks what a feminist intersectional perspective in HCXAI research and design might look like. Sketching out initial research directions and implications for explainable AI design, it suggests that explainability from a feminist perspective would include the fostering of response-ability - the capacity to critically evaluate and respond to AI systems - and would centre marginalised perspectives.

Explaining artificial intelligence or machine learning models is increasingly important. To use such data-driven systems wisely we must understand how they interact with the world, including how they depend causally on data inputs. In this work we develop Causal Dependence Plots (CDPs) to visualize how one variable--an outcome--depends on changes in another variable--a predictor--$\textit{along with any consequent causal changes in other predictor variables}$. Crucially, CDPs differ from standard methods based on holding other predictors constant or assuming they are independent. CDPs make use of an auxiliary causal model because causal conclusions require causal assumptions. With simulations and real data experiments, we show CDPs can be combined in a modular way with methods for causal learning or sensitivity analysis. Since people often think causally about input-output dependence, CDPs can be powerful tools in the xAI or interpretable machine learning toolkit and contribute to applications like scientific machine learning and algorithmic fairness.

Human computation is an approach to solving problems that prove difficult using AI only, and involves the cooperation of many humans. Because human computation requires close engagement with both "human populations as users" and "human populations as driving forces," establishing mutual trust between AI and humans is an important issue to further the development of human computation. This survey lays the groundwork for the realization of trustworthy human computation. First, the trustworthiness of human computation as computing systems, that is, trust offered by humans to AI, is examined using the RAS (Reliability, Availability, and Serviceability) analogy, which define measures of trustworthiness in conventional computer systems. Next, the social trustworthiness provided by human computation systems to users or participants is discussed from the perspective of AI ethics, including fairness, privacy, and transparency. Then, we consider human--AI collaboration based on two-way trust, in which humans and AI build mutual trust and accomplish difficult tasks through reciprocal collaboration. Finally, future challenges and research directions for realizing trustworthy human computation are discussed.

Improving Vaccine Stance Detection by Combining Online and Offline Data

Anique Tahir, Lu Cheng, Paras Sheth +1

Differing opinions about COVID-19 have led to various online discourses regarding vaccines. Due to the detrimental effects and the scale of the COVID-19 pandemic, detecting vaccine stance has become especially important and is attracting increasing attention. Communication during the pandemic is typically done via online and offline sources, which provide two complementary avenues for detecting vaccine stance. Therefore, this paper aims to (1) study the importance of integrating online and offline data to vaccine stance detection; and (2) identify the critical online and offline attributes that influence an individual's vaccine stance. We model vaccine hesitancy as a surrogate for identifying the importance of online and offline factors. With the aid of explainable AI and combinatorial analysis, we conclude that both online and offline factors help predict vaccine stance.

Decisions in organizations are about evaluating alternatives and choosing the one that would best serve organizational goals. To the extent that the evaluation of alternatives could be formulated as a predictive task with appropriate metrics, machine learning algorithms are increasingly being used to improve the efficiency of the process. Explanations help to facilitate communication between the algorithm and the human decision-maker, making it easier for the latter to interpret and make decisions on the basis of predictions by the former. Feature-based explanations' semantics of causal models, however, induce leakage from the decision-maker's prior beliefs. Our findings from a field experiment demonstrate empirically how this leads to confirmation bias and disparate impact on the decision-maker's confidence in the predictions. Such differences can lead to sub-optimal and biased decision outcomes.

Item ranking systems support users in multi-criteria decision-making tasks. Users need to trust rankings and ranking algorithms to reflect user preferences nicely while avoiding systematic errors and biases. However, today only few approaches help end users, model developers, and analysts to explain rankings. We report on the study of explanation approaches from the perspectives of recommender systems, explainable AI, and visualization research and propose the first cross-domain design space for explainers of item rankings. In addition, we leverage the descriptive power of the design space to characterize a) existing explainers and b) three main user groups involved in ranking explanation tasks. The generative power of the design space is a means for future designers and developers to create more target-oriented solutions in this only weakly exploited space.