The increasing use of Machine Learning (ML) software can lead to unfair and unethical decisions, thus fairness bugs in software are becoming a growing concern. Addressing these fairness bugs often involves sacrificing ML performance, such as accuracy. To address this issue, we present a novel counterfactual approach that uses counterfactual thinking to tackle the root causes of bias in ML software. In addition, our approach combines models optimized for both performance and fairness, resulting in an optimal solution in both aspects. We conducted a thorough evaluation of our approach on 10 benchmark tasks using a combination of 5 performance metrics, 3 fairness metrics, and 15 measurement scenarios, all applied to 8 real-world datasets. The conducted extensive evaluations show that the proposed method significantly improves the fairness of ML software while maintaining competitive performance, outperforming state-of-the-art solutions in 84.6% of overall cases based on a recent benchmarking tool.
相關內容
Due to the model aging problem, Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) need updates to adjust them to new data distributions. The common practice leverages incremental learning (IL), e.g., Class-based Incremental Learning (CIL) that updates output labels, to update the model with new data and a limited number of old data. This avoids heavyweight training (from scratch) using conventional methods and saves storage space by reducing the number of old data to store. But it also leads to poor performance in fairness. In this paper, we show that CIL suffers both dataset and algorithm bias problems, and existing solutions can only partially solve the problem. We propose a novel framework, CILIATE, that fixes both dataset and algorithm bias in CIL. It features a novel differential analysis guided dataset and training refinement process that identifies unique and important samples overlooked by existing CIL and enforces the model to learn from them. Through this process, CILIATE improves the fairness of CIL by 17.03%, 22.46%, and 31.79% compared to state-of-the-art methods, iCaRL, BiC, and WA, respectively, based on our evaluation on three popular datasets and widely used ResNet models.
We present a novel framework for probing and improving relational, compositional and contextual understanding of large visual-language models (V+L). While large V+L models have achieved success in various downstream tasks, it is not clear if they have a conceptual grasp of the content. We propose a novel benchmarking dataset for probing three aspects of content understanding. Our probes are grounded in cognitive science and help determine if a V+L model can, for example, determine if snow garnished with a man is implausible, or if it can identify beach furniture by knowing it is located on a beach. We have experimented with 5 well known models, such as CLIP and ViLT, and found that they mostly fail to demonstrate a conceptual understanding. That said, we find interesting insights such as cross-attention helps learning conceptual understanding. We use these insights to propose a new finetuning technique that rewards the three conceptual understanding measures we proposed. We hope that the presented benchmarks will help the community assess and improve the conceptual understanding capabilities of large V+L models.
Class imbalance (CI) in classification problems arises when the number of observations belonging to one class is lower than the other classes. Ensemble learning that combines multiple models to obtain a robust model has been prominently used with data augmentation methods to address class imbalance problems. In the last decade, a number of strategies have been added to enhance ensemble learning and data augmentation methods, along with new methods such as generative adversarial networks (GANs). A combination of these has been applied in many studies, but the true rank of different combinations would require a computational review. In this paper, we present a computational review to evaluate data augmentation and ensemble learning methods used to address prominent benchmark CI problems. We propose a general framework that evaluates 10 data augmentation and 10 ensemble learning methods for CI problems. Our objective was to identify the most effective combination for improving classification performance on imbalanced datasets. The results indicate that combinations of data augmentation methods with ensemble learning can significantly improve classification performance on imbalanced datasets. These findings have important implications for the development of more effective approaches for handling imbalanced datasets in machine learning applications.
Machine Learning (ML) models are widely employed to drive many modern data systems. While they are undeniably powerful tools, ML models often demonstrate imbalanced performance and unfair behaviors. The root of this problem often lies in the fact that different subpopulations commonly display divergent trends: as a learning algorithm tries to identify trends in the data, it naturally favors the trends of the majority groups, leading to a model that performs poorly and unfairly for minority populations. Our goal is to improve the fairness and trustworthiness of ML models by applying only non-invasive interventions, i.e., without altering the data or the learning algorithm. We use a simple but key insight: the divergence of trends between different populations, and, consecutively, between a learned model and minority populations, is analogous to data drift, which indicates the poor conformance between parts of the data and the trained model. We explore two strategies (model-splitting and reweighing) to resolve this drift, aiming to improve the overall conformance of models to the underlying data. Both our methods introduce novel ways to employ the recently-proposed data profiling primitive of Conformance Constraints. Our experimental evaluation over 7 real-world datasets shows that both DifFair and ConFair improve the fairness of ML models. We demonstrate scenarios where DifFair has an edge, though ConFair has the greatest practical impact and outperforms other baselines. Moreover, as a model-agnostic technique, ConFair stays robust when used against different models than the ones on which the weights have been learned, which is not the case for other state of the art.
Accurate and robust trajectory predictions of road users are needed to enable safe automated driving. To do this, machine learning models are often used, which can show erratic behavior when presented with previously unseen inputs. In this work, two environment-aware models (MotionCNN and MultiPath++) and two common baselines (Constant Velocity and an LSTM) are benchmarked for robustness against various perturbations that simulate functional insufficiencies observed during model deployment in a vehicle: unavailability of road information, late detections, and noise. Results show significant performance degradation under the presence of these perturbations, with errors increasing up to +1444.8\% in commonly used trajectory prediction evaluation metrics. Training the models with similar perturbations effectively reduces performance degradation, with error increases of up to +87.5\%. We argue that despite being an effective mitigation strategy, data augmentation through perturbations during training does not guarantee robustness towards unforeseen perturbations, since identification of all possible on-road complications is unfeasible. Furthermore, degrading the inputs sometimes leads to more accurate predictions, suggesting that the models are unable to learn the true relationships between the different elements in the data.
Recent advances in Federated Learning (FL) have brought large-scale collaborative machine learning opportunities for massively distributed clients with performance and data privacy guarantees. However, most current works focus on the interest of the central controller in FL,and overlook the interests of the FL clients. This may result in unfair treatment of clients that discourages them from actively participating in the learning process and damages the sustainability of the FL ecosystem. Therefore, the topic of ensuring fairness in FL is attracting a great deal of research interest. In recent years, diverse Fairness-Aware FL (FAFL) approaches have been proposed in an effort to achieve fairness in FL from different perspectives. However, there is no comprehensive survey that helps readers gain insight into this interdisciplinary field. This paper aims to provide such a survey. By examining the fundamental and simplifying assumptions, as well as the notions of fairness adopted by existing literature in this field, we propose a taxonomy of FAFL approaches covering major steps in FL, including client selection, optimization, contribution evaluation and incentive distribution. In addition, we discuss the main metrics for experimentally evaluating the performance of FAFL approaches, and suggest promising future research directions towards FAFL.
In recent years, Graph Neural Networks have reported outstanding performance in tasks like community detection, molecule classification and link prediction. However, the black-box nature of these models prevents their application in domains like health and finance, where understanding the models' decisions is essential. Counterfactual Explanations (CE) provide these understandings through examples. Moreover, the literature on CE is flourishing with novel explanation methods which are tailored to graph learning. In this survey, we analyse the existing Graph Counterfactual Explanation methods, by providing the reader with an organisation of the literature according to a uniform formal notation for definitions, datasets, and metrics, thus, simplifying potential comparisons w.r.t to the method advantages and disadvantages. We discussed seven methods and sixteen synthetic and real datasets providing details on the possible generation strategies. We highlight the most common evaluation strategies and formalise nine of the metrics used in the literature. We first introduce the evaluation framework GRETEL and how it is possible to extend and use it while providing a further dimension of comparison encompassing reproducibility aspects. Finally, we provide a discussion on how counterfactual explanation interplays with privacy and fairness, before delving into open challenges and future works.
Structural data well exists in Web applications, such as social networks in social media, citation networks in academic websites, and threads data in online forums. Due to the complex topology, it is difficult to process and make use of the rich information within such data. Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have shown great advantages on learning representations for structural data. However, the non-transparency of the deep learning models makes it non-trivial to explain and interpret the predictions made by GNNs. Meanwhile, it is also a big challenge to evaluate the GNN explanations, since in many cases, the ground-truth explanations are unavailable. In this paper, we take insights of Counterfactual and Factual (CF^2) reasoning from causal inference theory, to solve both the learning and evaluation problems in explainable GNNs. For generating explanations, we propose a model-agnostic framework by formulating an optimization problem based on both of the two casual perspectives. This distinguishes CF^2 from previous explainable GNNs that only consider one of them. Another contribution of the work is the evaluation of GNN explanations. For quantitatively evaluating the generated explanations without the requirement of ground-truth, we design metrics based on Counterfactual and Factual reasoning to evaluate the necessity and sufficiency of the explanations. Experiments show that no matter ground-truth explanations are available or not, CF^2 generates better explanations than previous state-of-the-art methods on real-world datasets. Moreover, the statistic analysis justifies the correlation between the performance on ground-truth evaluation and our proposed metrics.
Games and simulators can be a valuable platform to execute complex multi-agent, multiplayer, imperfect information scenarios with significant parallels to military applications: multiple participants manage resources and make decisions that command assets to secure specific areas of a map or neutralize opposing forces. These characteristics have attracted the artificial intelligence (AI) community by supporting development of algorithms with complex benchmarks and the capability to rapidly iterate over new ideas. The success of artificial intelligence algorithms in real-time strategy games such as StarCraft II have also attracted the attention of the military research community aiming to explore similar techniques in military counterpart scenarios. Aiming to bridge the connection between games and military applications, this work discusses past and current efforts on how games and simulators, together with the artificial intelligence algorithms, have been adapted to simulate certain aspects of military missions and how they might impact the future battlefield. This paper also investigates how advances in virtual reality and visual augmentation systems open new possibilities in human interfaces with gaming platforms and their military parallels.
Machine learning plays a role in many deployed decision systems, often in ways that are difficult or impossible to understand by human stakeholders. Explaining, in a human-understandable way, the relationship between the input and output of machine learning models is essential to the development of trustworthy machine-learning-based systems. A burgeoning body of research seeks to define the goals and methods of explainability in machine learning. In this paper, we seek to review and categorize research on counterfactual explanations, a specific class of explanation that provides a link between what could have happened had input to a model been changed in a particular way. Modern approaches to counterfactual explainability in machine learning draw connections to the established legal doctrine in many countries, making them appealing to fielded systems in high-impact areas such as finance and healthcare. Thus, we design a rubric with desirable properties of counterfactual explanation algorithms and comprehensively evaluate all currently-proposed algorithms against that rubric. Our rubric provides easy comparison and comprehension of the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches and serves as an introduction to major research themes in this field. We also identify gaps and discuss promising research directions in the space of counterfactual explainability.
小貼士
登錄享
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191