Research Papers

Towards Algorithmic Transparency: A Diversity Perspective

Fausto Giunchiglia, Jahna Otterbacher, Styliani Kleanthous +4

As the role of algorithmic systems and processes increases in society, so does the risk of bias, which can result in discrimination against individuals and social groups. Research on algorithmic bias has exploded in recent years, highlighting both the problems of bias, and the potential solutions, in terms of algorithmic transparency (AT). Transparency is important for facilitating fairness management as well as explainability in algorithms; however, the concept of diversity, and its relationship to bias and transparency, has been largely left out of the discussion. We reflect on the relationship between diversity and bias, arguing that diversity drives the need for transparency. Using a perspective-taking lens, which takes diversity as a given, we propose a conceptual framework to characterize the problem and solution spaces of AT, to aid its application in algorithmic systems. Example cases from three research domains are described using our framework.

Predicting Court Decisions for Alimony: Avoiding Extra-legal Factors in Decision made by Judges and Not Understandable AI Models

Fabrice Muhlenbach, Long Nguyen Phuoc, Isabelle Sayn

The advent of machine learning techniques has made it possible to obtain predictive systems that have overturned traditional legal practices. However, rather than leading to systems seeking to replace humans, the search for the determinants in a court decision makes it possible to give a better understanding of the decision mechanisms carried out by the judge. By using a large amount of court decisions in matters of divorce produced by French jurisdictions and by looking at the variables that allow to allocate an alimony or not, and to define its amount, we seek to identify if there may be extra-legal factors in the decisions taken by the judges. From this perspective, we present an explainable AI model designed in this purpose by combining a classification with random forest and a regression model, as a complementary tool to existing decision-making scales or guidelines created by practitioners.

The potential risk of AI systems unintentionally embedding and reproducing bias has attracted the attention of machine learning practitioners and society at large. As policy makers are willing to set the standards of algorithms and AI techniques, the issue on how to refine existing regulation, in order to enforce that decisions made by automated systems are fair and non-discriminatory, is again critical. Meanwhile, researchers have demonstrated that the various existing metrics for fairness are statistically mutually exclusive and the right choice mostly depends on the use case and the definition of fairness. Recognizing that the solutions for implementing fair AI are not purely mathematical but require the commitments of the stakeholders to define the desired nature of fairness, this paper proposes to draft a toolbox which helps practitioners to ensure fair AI practices. Based on the nature of the application and the available training data, but also on legal requirements and ethical, philosophical and cultural dimensions, the toolbox aims to identify the most appropriate fairness objective. This approach attempts to structure the complex landscape of fairness metrics and, therefore, makes the different available options more accessible to non-technical people. In the proven absence of a silver bullet solution for fair AI, this toolbox intends to produce the fairest AI systems possible with respect to their local context.

How Personal is Machine Learning Personalization?

Travis Greene, Galit Shmueli

Though used extensively, the concept and process of machine learning (ML) personalization have generally received little attention from academics, practitioners, and the general public. We describe the ML approach as relying on the metaphor of the person as a feature vector and contrast this with humanistic views of the person. In light of the recent calls by the IEEE to consider the effects of ML on human well-being, we ask whether ML personalization can be reconciled with these humanistic views of the person, which highlight the importance of moral and social identity. As human behavior increasingly becomes digitized, analyzed, and predicted, to what extent do our subsequent decisions about what to choose, buy, or do, made both by us and others, reflect who we are as persons? This paper first explicates the term personalization by considering ML personalization and highlights its relation to humanistic conceptions of the person, then proposes several dimensions for evaluating the degree of personalization of ML personalized scores. By doing so, we hope to contribute to current debate on the issues of algorithmic bias, transparency, and fairness in machine learning.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have a high accuracy on image classification tasks. However, DNNs trained by such dataset with co-occurrence bias may rely on wrong features while making decisions for classification. It will greatly affect the transferability of pre-trained DNNs. In this paper, we propose an interactive method to direct classifiers paying attentions to the regions that are manually specified by the users, in order to mitigate the influence of co-occurrence bias. We test on CelebA dataset, the pre-trained AlexNet is fine-tuned to focus on the specific facial attributes based on the results of Grad-CAM.

Large language models (LLMs) have introduced substantial challenges to software quality assurance due to their generative, probabilistic, and open-ended nature, which intensifies the oracle problem and limits the applicability of traditional testing methods. Metamorphic testing (MT), which checks necessary relations among multiple related executions rather than relying on exact expected outputs, has emerged as a promising approach for testing LLMs and other oracle-deficient systems. At the same time, the strong semantic understanding, reasoning, and code generation capabilities of LLMs create new opportunities to automate the traditionally labor-intensive phases of MT. This survey systematically reviews 93 primary studies and characterizes this reciprocal relationship as the bidirectional empowerment of MT and LLMs. We propose a taxonomy spanning two complementary directions: MT for LLMs, which uses MT to verify, validate, assess, and understand LLMs and LLM-based systems across issues such as hallucination, fairness, robustness, code reliability, retrieval-augmented generation, dialogue, and autonomous agents; and LLMs for MT, which leverages LLMs to support metamorphic relation discovery, input transformation and synthesis, executable test implementation, and agentic closed-loop testing. By synthesizing these developments, this survey provides a structured foundation for understanding the evolving synergy between MT and LLMs and highlights future directions for building more rigorous, scalable, and trustworthy AI quality assurance methodologies.

As large language models are increasingly deployed as interacting agents in high-stakes decisions, the AI safety community assumes that safety properties of individual models will compose into safe multi-agent behavior. This position paper argues that this assumption is fundamentally mistaken. In agentic AI, safety is determined by interaction topology, not model weights. When agents deliberate sequentially or aggregate via parallel voting with a judge, the structure of information flow and decision coupling dominates outcomes. Evidence across model families and scales reveals three persistent topology-driven pathologies: ordering instability, where system behavior depends primarily on agent sequence; information cascades, where early judgments propagate regardless of correctness; and functional collapse, where systems satisfy fairness metrics while abandoning meaningful risk discrimination. Contrary to intuition, scaling to more capable models strengthens these effects by increasing consensus formation and reducing the challenge of initial decisions. These failure modes are invisible to model-centric evaluation and alignment procedures. We argue that agentic AI must be treated as a dynamical system rather than a collection of aligned components. Interaction topology must become a primary target of safety evaluation and regulation, with systems required to demonstrate robustness across architectural variations before deployment.

Recruiters and job seekers rely on search systems to navigate labor markets, making candidate matching engines critical for hiring outcomes. Most systems act as keyword filters, failing to handle skill synonyms and nonlinear careers, resulting in missed candidates and opaque match scores. We introduce JobMatchAI, a production-ready system integrating Transformer embeddings, skill knowledge graphs, and interpretable reranking. Our system optimizes utility across skill fit, experience, location, salary, and company preferences, providing factor-wise explanations through resume-driven search workflows. We release JobSearch-XS benchmark and a hybrid retrieval stack combining BM25, knowledge graph and semantic components to evaluate skill generalization. We assess system performance on JobSearch-XS across retrieval tasks, provide a demo video, a hosted website and installable package.

Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly shape global discourse, making fairness and ideological neutrality essential for responsible AI deployment. Despite growing attention to political bias in LLMs, prior work largely focuses on high-resource, Western languages or narrow multilingual settings, leaving cross-lingual consistency and safe post-hoc mitigation underexplored. To address this gap, we present a large-scale multilingual evaluation of political bias spanning 50 countries and 33 languages. We introduce a complementary post-hoc mitigation framework, Cross-Lingual Alignment Steering (CLAS), designed to augment existing steering methods by aligning ideological representations across languages and dynamically regulating intervention strength. This method aligns latent ideological representations induced by political prompts into a shared ideological subspace, ensuring cross lingual consistency, with the adaptive mechanism prevents over correction and preserves coherence. Experiments demonstrate substantial bias reduction along both economic and social axes with minimal degradation in response quality. The proposed framework establishes a scalable and interpretable paradigm for fairness-aware multilingual LLM governance, balancing ideological neutrality with linguistic and cultural diversity.

Significant digitalization of financial services in a short period of time has led to an urgent demand to have autonomous, transparent and real-time credit risk decision making systems. The traditional machine learning models are effective in pattern recognition, but do not have the adaptive reasoning, situational awareness, and autonomy needed in modern financial operations. As a proposal, this paper presents an Agentic AI framework, or a system where AI agents view the world of dynamic credit independent of human observers, who then make actions based on their articulable decision-making paths. The research introduces a multi-agent system with reinforcing learning, natural language reasoning, explainable AI modules, and real-time data absorption pipelines as a means of assessing the risk profiles of borrowers with few humans being involved. The processes consist of agent collaboration protocol, risk-scoring engines, interpretability layers, and continuous feedback learning cycles. Findings indicate that decision speed, transparency and responsiveness is better than traditional credit scoring models. Nevertheless, there are still some practical limitations such as risks of model drift, inconsistencies in interpreting high dimensional data and regulatory uncertainties as well as infrastructure limitations in low-resource settings. The suggested system has a high prospective to transform credit analytics and future studies ought to be directed on dynamic regulatory compliance mobilizers, new agent teamwork, adversarial robustness, and large-scale implementation in cross-country credit ecosystems.

Nowadays, Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Machine Learning (ML) and Large Language Models (LLMs), is widely applied across various contexts. However, the corresponding models often operate as black boxes, leading them to unintentionally act unfairly towards different demographic groups. This has led to a growing focus on fairness in AI software recently, alongside the traditional focus on the effectiveness of AI models. Through 26 semi-structured interviews with practitioners from different application domains and with varied backgrounds across 23 countries, we conducted research on fairness requirements in AI from software engineering perspective. Our study assesses the participants' awareness of fairness in AI / ML software and its application within the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC), from translating fairness concerns into requirements to assessing their arising early in the SDLC. It also examines fairness through the key assessment dimensions of implementation, validation, evaluation, and how it is balanced with trade-offs involving other priorities, such as addressing all the software functionalities and meeting critical delivery deadlines. Findings of our thematic qualitative analysis show that while our participants recognize the aforementioned AI fairness dimensions, practices are inconsistent, and fairness is often deprioritized with noticeable knowledge gaps. This highlights the need for agreement with relevant stakeholders on well-defined, contextually appropriate fairness definitions, the corresponding evaluation metrics, and formalized processes to better integrate fairness into AI/ML projects.

Link-analysis algorithms, such as PageRank, are instrumental in understanding the structural dynamics of networks by evaluating the importance of individual vertices based on their connectivity. Recently, with the rising importance of responsible AI, the question of fairness in link-analysis algorithms has gained traction. In this paper, we present a new approach for incorporating group fairness into the PageRank algorithm by reweighting the transition probabilities in the underlying transition matrix. We formulate the problem of achieving fair PageRank by seeking to minimize the fairness loss, which is the difference between the original group-wise PageRank distribution and a target PageRank distribution. We further define a group-adapted fairness notion, which accounts for group homophily by considering random walks with group-biased restart for each group. Since the fairness loss is non-convex, we propose an efficient projected gradient-descent method for computing locally-optimal edge weights. Unlike earlier approaches, we do not recommend adding new edges to the network, nor do we adjust the restart vector. Instead, we keep the topology of the underlying network unchanged and only modify the relative importance of existing edges. We empirically compare our approach with state-of-the-art baselines and demonstrate the efficacy of our method, where very small changes in the transition matrix lead to significant improvement in the fairness of the PageRank algorithm.