Datasets can be biased due to societal inequities, human biases, under-representation of minorities, etc. Our goal is to certify that models produced by a learning algorithm are pointwise-robust to potential dataset biases. This is a challenging problem: it entails learning models for a large, or even infinite, number of datasets, ensuring that they all produce the same prediction. We focus on decision-tree learning due to the interpretable nature of the models. Our approach allows programmatically specifying bias models across a variety of dimensions (e.g., missing data for minorities), composing types of bias, and targeting bias towards a specific group. To certify robustness, we use a novel symbolic technique to evaluate a decision-tree learner on a large, or infinite, number of datasets, certifying that each and every dataset produces the same prediction for a specific test point. We evaluate our approach on datasets that are commonly used in the fairness literature, and demonstrate our approach's viability on a range of bias models.
相關內容
To interpret uncertainty estimates from differentiable probabilistic models, recent work has proposed generating Counterfactual Latent Uncertainty Explanations (CLUEs). However, for a single input, such approaches could output a variety of explanations due to the lack of constraints placed on the explanation. Here we augment the original CLUE approach, to provide what we call $\delta$-CLUE. CLUE indicates $\it{one}$ way to change an input, while remaining on the data manifold, such that the model becomes more confident about its prediction. We instead return a $\it{set}$ of plausible CLUEs: multiple, diverse inputs that are within a $\delta$ ball of the original input in latent space, all yielding confident predictions.
A reinforcement learning (RL) control policy trained in a nominal environment could fail in a new/perturbed environment due to the existence of dynamic variations. For controlling systems with continuous state and action spaces, we propose an add-on approach to robustifying a pre-trained RLpolicy by augmenting it with an $\mathcal{L}_{1}$ adaptive controller ($ \mathcal{L}_{1}$AC). Leveraging the capability of an $\mathcal{L}_{1}$AC for fast estimation and active compensation of dynamic variations, the proposed approach can improve the robustness of an RL policy which is trained either in a simulator or in the real world without consideration of a broad class of dynamic variations. Numerical and real-world experiments empirically demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed approach in robustifying RL policies trained using both model-free and model-based methods. A video for the experiments on a real Pendubot setup is availableat//youtu.be/xgOB9vpyUgE.
Transferability of adversarial samples became a serious concern due to their impact on the reliability of machine learning system deployments, as they find their way into many critical applications. Knowing factors that influence transferability of adversarial samples can assist experts to make informed decisions on how to build robust and reliable machine learning systems. The goal of this study is to provide insights on the mechanisms behind the transferability of adversarial samples through an attack-centric approach. This attack-centric perspective interprets how adversarial samples would transfer by assessing the impact of machine learning attacks (that generated them) on a given input dataset. To achieve this goal, we generated adversarial samples using attacker models and transferred these samples to victim models. We analyzed the behavior of adversarial samples on victim models and outlined four factors that can influence the transferability of adversarial samples. Although these factors are not necessarily exhaustive, they provide useful insights to researchers and practitioners of machine learning systems.
We consider a randomized controlled trial between two groups. The objective is to identify a population with characteristics such that the test therapy is more effective than the control therapy. Such a population is called a subgroup. This identification can be made by estimating the treatment effect and identifying interactions between treatments and covariates. To date, many methods have been proposed to identify subgroups for a single outcome. There are also multiple outcomes, but they are difficult to interpret and cannot be applied to outcomes other than continuous values. In this paper, we propose a multivariate regression method that introduces latent variables to estimate the treatment effect on multiple outcomes simultaneously. The proposed method introduces latent variables and adds Lasso sparsity constraints to the estimated loadings to facilitate the interpretation of the relationship between outcomes and covariates. The framework of the generalized linear model makes it applicable to various types of outcomes. Interpretation of subgroups is made by visualizing treatment effects and latent variables. This allows us to identify subgroups with characteristics that make the test therapy more effective for multiple outcomes. Simulation and real data examples demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.
Heterogeneous tabular data are the most commonly used form of data and are essential for numerous critical and computationally demanding applications. On homogeneous data sets, deep neural networks have repeatedly shown excellent performance and have therefore been widely adopted. However, their application to modeling tabular data (inference or generation) remains highly challenging. This work provides an overview of state-of-the-art deep learning methods for tabular data. We start by categorizing them into three groups: data transformations, specialized architectures, and regularization models. We then provide a comprehensive overview of the main approaches in each group. A discussion of deep learning approaches for generating tabular data is complemented by strategies for explaining deep models on tabular data. Our primary contribution is to address the main research streams and existing methodologies in this area, while highlighting relevant challenges and open research questions. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first in-depth look at deep learning approaches for tabular data. This work can serve as a valuable starting point and guide for researchers and practitioners interested in deep learning with tabular data.
A key challenge of big data analytics is how to collect a large volume of (labeled) data. Crowdsourcing aims to address this challenge via aggregating and estimating high-quality data (e.g., sentiment label for text) from pervasive clients/users. Existing studies on crowdsourcing focus on designing new methods to improve the aggregated data quality from unreliable/noisy clients. However, the security aspects of such crowdsourcing systems remain under-explored to date. We aim to bridge this gap in this work. Specifically, we show that crowdsourcing is vulnerable to data poisoning attacks, in which malicious clients provide carefully crafted data to corrupt the aggregated data. We formulate our proposed data poisoning attacks as an optimization problem that maximizes the error of the aggregated data. Our evaluation results on one synthetic and two real-world benchmark datasets demonstrate that the proposed attacks can substantially increase the estimation errors of the aggregated data. We also propose two defenses to reduce the impact of malicious clients. Our empirical results show that the proposed defenses can substantially reduce the estimation errors of the data poisoning attacks.
This paper focuses on the expected difference in borrower's repayment when there is a change in the lender's credit decisions. Classical estimators overlook the confounding effects and hence the estimation error can be magnificent. As such, we propose another approach to construct the estimators such that the error can be greatly reduced. The proposed estimators are shown to be unbiased, consistent, and robust through a combination of theoretical analysis and numerical testing. Moreover, we compare the power of estimating the causal quantities between the classical estimators and the proposed estimators. The comparison is tested across a wide range of models, including linear regression models, tree-based models, and neural network-based models, under different simulated datasets that exhibit different levels of causality, different degrees of nonlinearity, and different distributional properties. Most importantly, we apply our approaches to a large observational dataset provided by a global technology firm that operates in both the e-commerce and the lending business. We find that the relative reduction of estimation error is strikingly substantial if the causal effects are accounted for correctly.
To make deliberate progress towards more intelligent and more human-like artificial systems, we need to be following an appropriate feedback signal: we need to be able to define and evaluate intelligence in a way that enables comparisons between two systems, as well as comparisons with humans. Over the past hundred years, there has been an abundance of attempts to define and measure intelligence, across both the fields of psychology and AI. We summarize and critically assess these definitions and evaluation approaches, while making apparent the two historical conceptions of intelligence that have implicitly guided them. We note that in practice, the contemporary AI community still gravitates towards benchmarking intelligence by comparing the skill exhibited by AIs and humans at specific tasks such as board games and video games. We argue that solely measuring skill at any given task falls short of measuring intelligence, because skill is heavily modulated by prior knowledge and experience: unlimited priors or unlimited training data allow experimenters to "buy" arbitrary levels of skills for a system, in a way that masks the system's own generalization power. We then articulate a new formal definition of intelligence based on Algorithmic Information Theory, describing intelligence as skill-acquisition efficiency and highlighting the concepts of scope, generalization difficulty, priors, and experience. Using this definition, we propose a set of guidelines for what a general AI benchmark should look like. Finally, we present a benchmark closely following these guidelines, the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC), built upon an explicit set of priors designed to be as close as possible to innate human priors. We argue that ARC can be used to measure a human-like form of general fluid intelligence and that it enables fair general intelligence comparisons between AI systems and humans.
Machine-learning models have demonstrated great success in learning complex patterns that enable them to make predictions about unobserved data. In addition to using models for prediction, the ability to interpret what a model has learned is receiving an increasing amount of attention. However, this increased focus has led to considerable confusion about the notion of interpretability. In particular, it is unclear how the wide array of proposed interpretation methods are related, and what common concepts can be used to evaluate them. We aim to address these concerns by defining interpretability in the context of machine learning and introducing the Predictive, Descriptive, Relevant (PDR) framework for discussing interpretations. The PDR framework provides three overarching desiderata for evaluation: predictive accuracy, descriptive accuracy and relevancy, with relevancy judged relative to a human audience. Moreover, to help manage the deluge of interpretation methods, we introduce a categorization of existing techniques into model-based and post-hoc categories, with sub-groups including sparsity, modularity and simulatability. To demonstrate how practitioners can use the PDR framework to evaluate and understand interpretations, we provide numerous real-world examples. These examples highlight the often under-appreciated role played by human audiences in discussions of interpretability. Finally, based on our framework, we discuss limitations of existing methods and directions for future work. We hope that this work will provide a common vocabulary that will make it easier for both practitioners and researchers to discuss and choose from the full range of interpretation methods.
Many current applications use recommendations in order to modify the natural user behavior, such as to increase the number of sales or the time spent on a website. This results in a gap between the final recommendation objective and the classical setup where recommendation candidates are evaluated by their coherence with past user behavior, by predicting either the missing entries in the user-item matrix, or the most likely next event. To bridge this gap, we optimize a recommendation policy for the task of increasing the desired outcome versus the organic user behavior. We show this is equivalent to learning to predict recommendation outcomes under a fully random recommendation policy. To this end, we propose a new domain adaptation algorithm that learns from logged data containing outcomes from a biased recommendation policy and predicts recommendation outcomes according to random exposure. We compare our method against state-of-the-art factorization methods, in addition to new approaches of causal recommendation and show significant improvements.
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191