State-of-the-art recommender systems have the ability to generate high-quality recommendations, but usually cannot provide intuitive explanations to humans due to the usage of black-box prediction models. The lack of transparency has highlighted the critical importance of improving the explainability of recommender systems. In this paper, we propose to extract causal rules from the user interaction history as post-hoc explanations for the black-box sequential recommendation mechanisms, whilst maintain the predictive accuracy of the recommendation model. Our approach firstly achieves counterfactual examples with the aid of a perturbation model, and then extracts personalized causal relationships for the recommendation model through a causal rule mining algorithm. Experiments are conducted on several state-of-the-art sequential recommendation models and real-world datasets to verify the performance of our model on generating causal explanations. Meanwhile, We evaluate the discovered causal explanations in terms of quality and fidelity, which show that compared with conventional association rules, causal rules can provide personalized and more effective explanations for the behavior of black-box recommendation models.

Reinforcement learning allows solving complex tasks, however, the learning tends to be task-specific and the sample efficiency remains a challenge. We present Plan2Explore, a self-supervised reinforcement learning agent that tackles both these challenges through a new approach to self-supervised exploration and fast adaptation to new tasks, which need not be known during exploration. During exploration, unlike prior methods which retrospectively compute the novelty of observations after the agent has already reached them, our agent acts efficiently by leveraging planning to seek out expected future novelty. After exploration, the agent quickly adapts to multiple downstream tasks in a zero or a few-shot manner. We evaluate on challenging control tasks from high-dimensional image inputs. Without any training supervision or task-specific interaction, Plan2Explore outperforms prior self-supervised exploration methods, and in fact, almost matches the performances oracle which has access to rewards. Videos and code at https://ramanans1.github.io/plan2explore/

ML-based predictive systems are increasingly used to support decisions with a critical impact on individuals' lives such as college admission, job hiring, child custody, criminal risk assessment, etc. As a result, fairness emerged as an important requirement to guarantee that predictive systems do not discriminate against specific individuals or entire sub-populations, in particular, minorities. Given the inherent subjectivity of viewing the concept of fairness, several notions of fairness have been introduced in the literature. This paper is a survey of fairness notions that, unlike other surveys in the literature, addresses the question of "which notion of fairness is most suited to a given real-world scenario and why?". Our attempt to answer this question consists in (1) identifying the set of fairness-related characteristics of the real-world scenario at hand, (2) analyzing the behavior of each fairness notion, and then (3) fitting these two elements to recommend the most suitable fairness notion in every specific setup. The results are summarized in a decision diagram that can be used by practitioners and policy makers to navigate the relatively large catalogue of fairness notions.

Increasingly, organizations are pairing humans with AI systems to improve decision-making and reducing costs. Proponents of human-centered AI argue that team performance can even further improve when the AI model explains its recommendations. However, a careful analysis of existing literature reveals that prior studies observed improvements due to explanations only when the AI, alone, outperformed both the human and the best human-AI team. This raises an important question: can explanations lead to complementary performance, i.e., with accuracy higher than both the human and the AI working alone? We address this question by devising comprehensive studies on human-AI teaming, where participants solve a task with help from an AI system without explanations and from one with varying types of AI explanation support. We carefully controlled to ensure comparable human and AI accuracy across experiments on three NLP datasets (two for sentiment analysis and one for question answering). While we found complementary improvements from AI augmentation, they were not increased by state-of-the-art explanations compared to simpler strategies, such as displaying the AI's confidence. We show that explanations increase the chance that humans will accept the AI's recommendation regardless of whether the AI is correct. While this clarifies the gains in team performance from explanations in prior work, it poses new challenges for human-centered AI: how can we best design systems to produce complementary performance? Can we develop explanatory approaches that help humans decide whether and when to trust AI input?

We consider the problem of learning to repair programs from diagnostic feedback (e.g., compiler error messages). Program repair is challenging for two reasons: First, it requires reasoning and tracking symbols across source code and diagnostic feedback. Second, labeled datasets available for program repair are relatively small. In this work, we propose novel solutions to these two challenges. First, we introduce a program-feedback graph, which connects symbols relevant to program repair in source code and diagnostic feedback, and then apply a graph neural network on top to model the reasoning process. Second, we present a self-supervised learning paradigm for program repair that leverages unlabeled programs available online to create a large amount of extra program repair examples, which we use to pre-train our models. We evaluate our proposed approach on two applications: correcting introductory programming assignments (DeepFix dataset) and correcting the outputs of program synthesis (SPoC dataset). Our final system, DrRepair, significantly outperforms prior work, achieving 68.2% full repair rate on DeepFix (+22.9% over the prior best), and 48.4% synthesis success rate on SPoC (+3.7% over the prior best).

Time-constrained decision processes have been ubiquitous in many fundamental applications in physics, biology and computer science. Recently, restart strategies have gained significant attention for boosting the efficiency of time-constrained processes by expediting the completion times. In this work, we investigate the bandit problem with controlled restarts for time-constrained decision processes, and develop provably good learning algorithms. In particular, we consider a bandit setting where each decision takes a random completion time, and yields a random and correlated reward at the end, with unknown values at the time of decision. The goal of the decision-maker is to maximize the expected total reward subject to a time constraint $\tau$. As an additional control, we allow the decision-maker to interrupt an ongoing task and forgo its reward for a potentially more rewarding alternative. For this problem, we develop efficient online learning algorithms with $O(\log(\tau))$ and $O(\sqrt{\tau\log(\tau)})$ regret in a finite and continuous action space of restart strategies, respectively. We demonstrate an applicability of our algorithm by using it to boost the performance of SAT solvers.

For example, both the PyramidNet-110 model [23] and the larger PyramidNet-Knowledge distillation has been used to transfer 200 model achieve perfect accuracy on the CIFAR100 [32] knowledge learned by a sophisticated model (teacher) to training set, while the latter has 3% higher generalization a simpler model (student). This technique is widely used to accuracy. This motivated transferring the "knowledge" compress model complexity. However, in most applications encoded in the more accurate larger model to the smaller the compressed student model suffers from an accuracy gap one. Knowledge Distillation [8, 27] (KD) established with its teacher. We propose extracurricular learning, a an important mechanism through which one model novel knowledge distillation method, that bridges this gap (typically of higher capacity, called teacher) can train by (1) modeling student and teacher output distributions; another model (typically a smaller model that satisfies (2) sampling examples from an approximation to the the computational budget, called student). KD has been underlying data distribution; and (3) matching student and implemented in many machine learning tasks, for example teacher output distributions over this extended set including image classification [27], object detection [12, 65], video uncertain samples. We conduct rigorous evaluations on labeling [74], natural language processing [60, 41, 57, 36, regression and classification tasks and show that compared 61], and speech recognition [11, 59, 37]. to the standard knowledge distillation, extracurricular The idea of KD is to encourage the student to imitate learning reduces the gap by 46% to 68%. This leads to teacher's behavior over a set of data points, called transferset.

Continual learning is the problem of sequentially learning new tasks or knowledge while protecting previously acquired knowledge. However, catastrophic forgetting poses a grand challenge for neural networks performing such learning process. Thus, neural networks that are deployed in the real world often struggle in scenarios where the data distribution is non-stationary (concept drift), imbalanced, or not always fully available, i.e., rare edge cases. We propose a Differentiable Hebbian Consolidation model which is composed of a Differentiable Hebbian Plasticity (DHP) Softmax layer that adds a rapid learning plastic component (compressed episodic memory) to the fixed (slow changing) parameters of the softmax output layer; enabling learned representations to be retained for a longer timescale. We demonstrate the flexibility of our method by integrating well-known task-specific synaptic consolidation methods to penalize changes in the slow weights that are important for each target task. We evaluate our approach on the Permuted MNIST, Split MNIST and Vision Datasets Mixture benchmarks, and introduce an imbalanced variant of Permuted MNIST -- a dataset that combines the challenges of class imbalance and concept drift. Our proposed model requires no additional hyperparameters and outperforms comparable baselines by reducing forgetting.

The study of network formation is pervasive in economics, sociology, and many other fields. In this paper, we model network formation as a ``choice'' that is made by nodes in a network to connect to other nodes. We study these ``choices'' using discrete-choice models, in which an agent chooses between two or more discrete alternatives. One framework for studying network formation is the multinomial logit (MNL) model. We highlight limitations of the MNL model on networks that are constructed from empirical data. We employ the ``repeated choice'' (RC) model to study network formation \cite{TrainRevelt97mixedlogit}. We argue that the RC model overcomes important limitations of the MNL model and is well-suited to study network formation. We also illustrate how to use the RC model to accurately study network formation using both synthetic and real-world networks. Using synthetic networks, we also compare the performance of the MNL model and the RC model; we find that the RC model estimates the data-generation process of our synthetic networks more accurately than the MNL model. We provide examples of qualitatively interesting questions -- the presence of homophily in a teen friendship network and the fact that new patents are more likely to cite older, more cited, and similar patents -- for which the RC model allows us to achieve insights.

The Variational Auto-Encoder (VAE) belongs to a class of models, which we will refer to as deep maximum likelihood models, that uses a deep neural network to learn a maximum likelihood model for some input data. They are perhaps the most simple and efficient deep maximum likelihood model available, and have thus gained popularity in representation learning and generative image modeling. Unfortunately, in my opinion, in some circles the term "VAE" has become somewhat synonymous with "an auto-encoder with stochastic regularization that generates useful or beautiful samples", which has led to various misconceptions about VAEs. In this tutorial, we will return to the probabilistic and information theoretic roots of VAEs, clarify common misconceptions about VAEs, and look at a toy example on 2D data that will illustrate the capabilities and limitations of VAEs. In Section 2, we will give an overview of what is a maximum likelihood model and what a VAE looks like.