Calgary
Pitfalls of Epistemic Uncertainty Quantification through Loss Minimisation
Uncertainty quantification has received increasing attention in machine learning in the recent past. In particular, a distinction between aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty has been found useful in this regard. The latter refers to the learner's (lack of) knowledge and appears to be especially difficult to measure and quantify. In this paper, we analyse a recent proposal based on the idea of a second-order learner, which yields predictions in the form of distributions over probability distributions. While standard (first-order) learners can be trained to predict accurate probabilities, namely by minimising suitable loss functions on sample data, we show that loss minimisation does not work for second-order predictors: The loss functions proposed for inducing such predictors do not incentivise the learner to represent its epistemic uncertainty in a faithful way.
A Gray Literature Study on Fairness Requirements in AI-enabled Software Engineering
Nguyen, Thanh, Boufaied, Chaima, Santos, Ronnie de Souza
Today, with the growing obsession with applying Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly Machine Learning (ML), to software across various contexts, much of the focus has been on the effectiveness of AI models, often measured through common metrics such as F1- score, while fairness receives relatively little attention. This paper presents a review of existing gray literature, examining fairness requirements in AI context, with a focus on how they are defined across various application domains, managed throughout the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC), and the causes, as well as the corresponding consequences of their violation by AI models. Our gray literature investigation shows various definitions of fairness requirements in AI systems, commonly emphasizing non-discrimination and equal treatment across different demographic and social attributes. Fairness requirement management practices vary across the SDLC, particularly in model training and bias mitigation, fairness monitoring and evaluation, and data handling practices. Fairness requirement violations are frequently linked, but not limited, to data representation bias, algorithmic and model design bias, human judgment, and evaluation and transparency gaps. The corresponding consequences include harm in a broad sense, encompassing specific professional and societal impacts as key examples, stereotype reinforcement, data and privacy risks, and loss of trust and legitimacy in AI-supported decisions. These findings emphasize the need for consistent frameworks and practices to integrate fairness into AI software, paying as much attention to fairness as to effectiveness.
From Frustration to Fun: An Adaptive Problem-Solving Puzzle Game Powered by Genetic Algorithm
McConnell, Matthew, Zhao, Richard
This paper explores adaptive problem solving with a game designed to support the development of problem-solving skills. Using an adaptive, AI-powered puzzle game, our adaptive problem-solving system dynamically generates pathfinding-based puzzles using a genetic algorithm, tailoring the difficulty of each puzzle to individual players in an online real-time approach. A player-modeling system records user interactions and informs the generation of puzzles to approximate a target difficulty level based on various metrics of the player. By combining procedural content generation with online adaptive difficulty adjustment, the system aims to maintain engagement, mitigate frustration, and maintain an optimal level of challenge. A pilot user study investigates the effectiveness of this approach, comparing different types of adaptive difficulty systems and interpreting players' responses. This work lays the foundation for further research into emotionally informed player models, advanced AI techniques for adaptivity, and broader applications beyond gaming in educational settings.