Federated learning (FL) is an emerging machine learning (ML) training paradigm where clients own their data and collaborate to train a global model, without revealing any data to the server and other participants. Researchers commonly perform experiments in a simulation environment to quickly iterate on ideas. However, existing open-source tools do not offer the efficiency required to simulate FL on larger and more realistic FL datasets. We introduce pfl-research, a fast, modular, and easy-to-use Python framework for simulating FL. It supports TensorFlow, PyTorch, and non-neural network models, and is tightly integrated with state-of-the-art privacy algorithms. We study the speed of open-source FL frameworks and show that pfl-research is 7-72$\times$ faster than alternative open-source frameworks on common cross-device setups. Such speedup will significantly boost the productivity of the FL research community and enable testing hypotheses on realistic FL datasets that were previously too resource intensive. We release a suite of benchmarks that evaluates an algorithm's overall performance on a diverse set of realistic scenarios. The code is available on GitHub at https://github.com/apple/pfl-research.

Industrial robotic applications such as spraying, welding, and additive manufacturing frequently require fast, accurate, and uniform motion along a 3D spatial curve. To increase process throughput, some manufacturers propose a dual-robot setup to overcome the speed limitation of a single robot. Industrial robot motion is programmed through waypoints connected by motion primitives (Cartesian linear and circular paths and linear joint paths at constant Cartesian speed). The actual robot motion is affected by the blending between these motion primitives and the pose of the robot (an outstretched/close to singularity pose tends to have larger path-tracking errors). Choosing the waypoints and the speed along each motion segment to achieve the performance requirement is challenging. At present, there is no automated solution, and laborious manual tuning by robot experts is needed to approach the desired performance. In this paper, we present a systematic three-step approach to designing and programming a dual-robot system to optimize system performance. The first step is to select the relative placement between the two robots based on the specified relative motion path. The second step is to select the relative waypoints and the motion primitives. The final step is to update the waypoints iteratively based on the actual relative motion. Waypoint iteration is first executed in simulation and then completed using the actual robots. For performance measures, we use the mean path speed subject to the relative position and orientation constraints and the path speed uniformity constraint. We have demonstrated the effectiveness of this method with ABB and FANUC robots on two challenging test curves. The performance improvement over the current industrial practice baseline is over 300%. Compared to the optimized single-arm case that we have previously reported, the improvement is over 14%.

In recent years, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have made significant advancements, particularly in tasks such as node classification, link prediction, and graph representation. However, challenges arise from biases that can be hidden not only in the node attributes but also in the connections between entities. Therefore, ensuring fairness in graph neural network learning has become a critical problem. To address this issue, we propose a novel model for training fairness-aware GNN, which enhances the Counterfactual Augmented Fair Graph Neural Network Framework (CAF). Our approach integrates Supervised Contrastive Loss and Environmental Loss to enhance both accuracy and fairness. Experimental validation on three real datasets demonstrates the superiority of our proposed model over CAF and several other existing graph-based learning methods.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across diverse tasks but are constrained by their small context window sizes. Various efforts have been proposed to expand the context window to accommodate even up to 200K input tokens. Meanwhile, building high-quality benchmarks with much longer text lengths and more demanding tasks to provide comprehensive evaluations is of immense practical interest to facilitate long context understanding research of LLMs. However, prior benchmarks create datasets that ostensibly cater to long-text comprehension by expanding the input of traditional tasks, which falls short to exhibit the unique characteristics of long-text understanding, including long dependency tasks and longer text length compatible with modern LLMs' context window size. In this paper, we introduce a benchmark for extremely long context understanding with long-range dependencies, XL$^2$Bench, which includes three scenarios: Fiction Reading, Paper Reading, and Law Reading, and four tasks of increasing complexity: Memory Retrieval, Detailed Understanding, Overall Understanding, and Open-ended Generation, covering 27 subtasks in English and Chinese. It has an average length of 100K+ words (English) and 200K+ characters (Chinese). Evaluating six leading LLMs on XL$^2$Bench, we find that their performance significantly lags behind human levels. Moreover, the observed decline in performance across both the original and enhanced datasets underscores the efficacy of our approach to mitigating data contamination.

Reading comprehension continues to be a crucial research focus in the NLP community. Recent advances in Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) have mostly centered on literal comprehension, referring to the surface-level understanding of content. In this work, we focus on the next level - interpretive comprehension, with a particular emphasis on inferring the themes of a narrative text. We introduce the first dataset specifically designed for interpretive comprehension of educational narratives, providing corresponding well-edited theme texts. The dataset spans a variety of genres and cultural origins and includes human-annotated theme keywords with varying levels of granularity. We further formulate NLP tasks under different abstractions of interpretive comprehension toward the main idea of a story. After conducting extensive experiments with state-of-the-art methods, we found the task to be both challenging and significant for NLP research.

Federated learning (FL) enables collaborative model training among multiple clients without raw data exposure. However, recent studies have shown that clients' private training data can be reconstructed from the gradients they share in FL, known as gradient inversion attacks (GIAs). While GIAs have demonstrated effectiveness under \emph{ideal settings and auxiliary assumptions}, their actual efficacy against \emph{practical FL systems} remains under-explored. To address this gap, we conduct a comprehensive study on GIAs in this work. We start with a survey of GIAs that establishes a milestone to trace their evolution and develops a systematization to uncover their inherent threats. Specifically, we categorize the auxiliary assumptions used by existing GIAs based on their practical accessibility to potential adversaries. To facilitate deeper analysis, we highlight the challenges that GIAs face in practical FL systems from three perspectives: \textit{local training}, \textit{model}, and \textit{post-processing}. We then perform extensive theoretical and empirical evaluations of state-of-the-art GIAs across diverse settings, utilizing eight datasets and thirteen models. Our findings indicate that GIAs have inherent limitations when reconstructing data under practical local training settings. Furthermore, their efficacy is sensitive to the trained model, and even simple post-processing measures applied to gradients can be effective defenses. Overall, our work provides crucial insights into the limited effectiveness of GIAs in practical FL systems. By rectifying prior misconceptions, we hope to inspire more accurate and realistic investigations on this topic.

The last two years have seen a rapid growth in concerns around the safety of large language models (LLMs). Researchers and practitioners have met these concerns by introducing an abundance of new datasets for evaluating and improving LLM safety. However, much of this work has happened in parallel, and with very different goals in mind, ranging from the mitigation of near-term risks around bias and toxic content generation to the assessment of longer-term catastrophic risk potential. This makes it difficult for researchers and practitioners to find the most relevant datasets for a given use case, and to identify gaps in dataset coverage that future work may fill. To remedy these issues, we conduct a first systematic review of open datasets for evaluating and improving LLM safety. We review 102 datasets, which we identified through an iterative and community-driven process over the course of several months. We highlight patterns and trends, such as a a trend towards fully synthetic datasets, as well as gaps in dataset coverage, such as a clear lack of non-English datasets. We also examine how LLM safety datasets are used in practice -- in LLM release publications and popular LLM benchmarks -- finding that current evaluation practices are highly idiosyncratic and make use of only a small fraction of available datasets. Our contributions are based on SafetyPrompts.com, a living catalogue of open datasets for LLM safety, which we commit to updating continuously as the field of LLM safety develops.

This paper investigates the influence of anthropomorphized descriptions of so-called "AI" (artificial intelligence) systems on people's self-assessment of trust in the system. Building on prior work, we define four categories of anthropomorphization (1. Properties of a cognizer, 2. Agency, 3. Biological metaphors, and 4. Properties of a communicator). We use a survey-based approach (n=954) to investigate whether participants are likely to trust one of two (fictitious) "AI" systems by randomly assigning people to see either an anthropomorphized or a de-anthropomorphized description of the systems. We find that participants are no more likely to trust anthropomorphized over de-anthropmorphized product descriptions overall. The type of product or system in combination with different anthropomorphic categories appears to exert greater influence on trust than anthropomorphizing language alone, and age is the only demographic factor that significantly correlates with people's preference for anthropomorphized or de-anthropomorphized descriptions. When elaborating on their choices, participants highlight factors such as lesser of two evils, lower or higher stakes contexts, and human favoritism as driving motivations when choosing between product A and B, irrespective of whether they saw an anthropomorphized or a de-anthropomorphized description of the product. Our results suggest that "anthropomorphism" in "AI" descriptions is an aggregate concept that may influence different groups differently, and provide nuance to the discussion of whether anthropomorphization leads to higher trust and over-reliance by the general public in systems sold as "AI".

Background: Clinical diagnosis is typically reached by following a series of steps recommended by guidelines authored by colleges of experts. Accordingly, guidelines play a crucial role in rationalizing clinical decisions but suffer from limitations as they are built to cover the majority of the population and fail at covering patients with uncommon conditions. Moreover, their updates are long and expensive, making them unsuitable for emerging diseases and practices. Methods: Inspired by guidelines, we formulate the task of diagnosis as a sequential decision-making problem and study the use of Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) algorithms to learn the optimal sequence of actions to perform in order to obtain a correct diagnosis from Electronic Health Records (EHRs). We apply DRL on synthetic, but realistic EHRs and develop two clinical use cases: Anemia diagnosis, where the decision pathways follow the schema of a decision tree; and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) diagnosis, which follows a weighted criteria score. We particularly evaluate the robustness of our approaches to noisy and missing data since these frequently occur in EHRs. Results: In both use cases, and in the presence of imperfect data, our best DRL algorithms exhibit competitive performance when compared to the traditional classifiers, with the added advantage that they enable the progressive generation of a pathway to the suggested diagnosis which can both guide and explain the decision-making process. Conclusion: DRL offers the opportunity to learn personalized decision pathways to diagnosis. We illustrate with our two use cases their advantages: they generate step-by-step pathways that are self-explanatory; and their correctness is competitive when compared to state-of-the-art approaches.

In some situations, the interpretability of the machine learning models plays a role as important as the model accuracy. Interpretability comes from the need to trust the prediction model, verify some of its properties, or even enforce them to improve fairness. Many model-agnostic explanatory methods exists to provide explanations for black-box models. In the regression task, the practitioner can use white-boxes or gray-boxes models to achieve more interpretable results, which is the case of symbolic regression. When using an explanatory method, and since interpretability lacks a rigorous definition, there is a need to evaluate and compare the quality and different explainers. This paper proposes a benchmark scheme to evaluate explanatory methods to explain regression models, mainly symbolic regression models. Experiments were performed using 100 physics equations with different interpretable and non-interpretable regression methods and popular explanation methods, evaluating the performance of the explainers performance with several explanation measures. In addition, we further analyzed four benchmarks from the GP community. The results have shown that Symbolic Regression models can be an interesting alternative to white-box and black-box models that is capable of returning accurate models with appropriate explanations. Regarding the explainers, we observed that Partial Effects and SHAP were the most robust explanation models, with Integrated Gradients being unstable only with tree-based models. This benchmark is publicly available for further experiments.